The Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) is poised to implement administrative regulations intended to implement and clarify Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) reforms enacted in 2024. On August 3, 2026, the LWDA released a modified set of proposed regulations that cover every stage of a PAGA matter—from how a notice is filed to how a settlement gets approved.
The LWDA initially proposed regulations in February 2026 based on “documented instances of some attorneys filing PAGA notices that are based on templates alleging frivolous, conclusory, or boilerplate violations of the Labor Code.” The proposed regulations drew comments and criticisms from both employers and employees.
Although the modified regulations address some issues, they still lack any meaningful consequences for abusive filing tactics. They also include settlement notification requirements that will motivate, if not incentivize, different law firms to file PAGA lawsuits based on alleged Labor Code violations that are already being litigated in a different PAGA lawsuit.
CDF encourages employers to submit comments opposing defective aspects of the proposed regulations before the public comment period ends on August 18, 2026.
You can review the full rulemaking record on the LWDA’s PAGA rulemaking page.
Here are the key takeaways from the modified regulations:
1. Filing Requirements That Can Create Timing Traps
Failure to file documents using the correct link or to pay required filing fees may result in missed or uncertain deadlines. For example, if an employee does not correctly file a PAGA notice through the LWDA’s online portal, it is not deemed filed. But the employer who receives a copy of the PAGA Notice via certified mail will not necessarily know whether the LWDA accepted the filing or when it did so. That can cause confusion about the employer’s deadline to submit a response or notice of cure.
2. Procedures to Ensure Sufficiently Alleged Claims That Can Increase the Statute of Limitations Period
PAGA notices must include a short and plain statement of the facts and theories supporting each alleged Labor Code violation that was alleged and personally suffered by the employee. This requirement should result in employers receiving more specific information concerning the alleged Labor Code violations, which should allow them to investigate claims and respond to them at an early stage.
However, if a PAGA notice is insufficient, the LWDA may—but is not required to—notify the filer of the deficiency and allow them to submit an amended notice within 30 days. Although this process might ultimately result in a compliant PAGA notice that allows employers to investigate the alleged violations and determine whether and how to respond and exercise their cure rights, this process can be abused to extend the statute of limitations period by prolonging the notice period.
3. PAGA Claimants Must Certify Their Claims if They Are Represented by Attorneys or Law Firms Who File Multiple PAGA Notices Per Week
The modified regulations expand the “high-frequency filer” designation to attorneys who filed 100 or more PAGA noticed in the prior year in addition to any law firm that has filed 200 or more PAGA notices in the prior year. Claimants who hire these “high-frequency” filers will be required to sign a certification stating that they have reviewed the PAGA notice and certify that the alleged violations are accurately described and not presented for an improper purpose.
4. Rules Aimed at Preventing Abusive Filing Tactics Can Increase the Limitations Period
The original proposed regulations called for a “vexatious filer” designation for attorneys who do not comply with PAGA notice requirements. The modified regulations referring to them as “non-compliant filers.” An attorney will not be deemed “non-compliant” unless they file three or more non-compliant PAGA notices in the prior year and they continue to do so after receiving a warning from the LWDA. Attorneys designated as a “non-compliant” filer will be subject to a prefiling screening process. However, the statute of limitations is tolled during this screening process.
CDF encourages employers to submit statements about this proposed regulation as it is not consistent with the PAGA’s pre-filing notice requirements set forth in Labor Code section 2699.3.
5. Rules Concerning Settlement Notification to Other PAGA Claimants Will Increase Settlement Delays and Costs
PAGA plaintiffs who assert meritless claims will often attempt to develop new theories of liability during the litigation and at mediation. Whether or not the new theories of liability have merit, settling employers want peace of mind and are willing to permit the employee to file an amended PAGA notice that includes the new theories. That common practice will now further delay settlements since the amended PAGA notices are subject to a new 65-day review period, and, if applicable, a 120-day investigation period.
The modified regulations require the submission of additional documents and information concerning the amended PAGA notices to allow the LWDA to evaluate PAGA settlements. That can create further delay and yet another obstacle to settlement.
The modified regulations also require notice of settlement to all other PAGA plaintiffs, which will likely lead to: (1) comments/objections by later-filing law firms upset about getting cut out of attorneys’ fees, (2) increased reliance on a price-per-pay-period “market rate” to assess the adequacy of PAGA settlements instead of a merits-based assessment, and (3) an increase in multi-plaintiff settlement negotiations or mediations which are generally more costly because each plaintiff’s firm will want their allocation of attorneys’ fees to be greater.
Big Picture – The Proposed Regulations Are Better Than Nothing
As noted, CDF encourages employers to submit comments opposing the tolling of the statute of limitations period during the LWDA’s “screening process” for notices submitted by “non-compliant” filers, along with any other aspects of the proposed regulations they wish to address.
The public comment period on the latest modifications closes on August 18, 2026, so employers and their counsel have a narrow window to weigh in before the rules are finalized. Comments may be submitted by email to Danielle West, Rulemaking and Program Analyst, at Danielle.West@labor.ca.gov. Written comments also may be submitted by mail to Danielle West, Rulemaking and Program Analyst, Labor and Workforce Development Agency, 1416 Ninth Street (MIC-55), Sacramento, CA 95814.
