California Moves to Tighten PAGA Oversight

The newly proposed regulations follow concerns expressed by both courts and the Legislature that PAGA has been “manipulated … by certain trial attorneys as a money-making scheme.” During fiscal year 2024–2025 alone, 8,846 PAGA notices were filed with the agency, with five law firms accounting for approximately 24% of all filings.

As such, the proposed regulations are intended to address filing practices that undermine the statute’s administrative processes, standardize procedures and strengthen oversight of notices, cure proceedings and settlements. In particular, the agency identifies concerns regarding high-volume template PAGA notices, noting that boilerplate notices lacking meaningful factual detail impede the LWDA’s ability to evaluate the alleged violations and limit employers’ ability to assess or implement potential cure measures. The agency also raises concerns regarding settlement practices—including “top filing” and “reverse auction” scenarios—that may frustrate administrative oversight and affect parallel PAGA actions against the same employer.

Below is a high-level summary of the proposed regulations. The LWDA has not yet scheduled a public hearing, but one may be held if requested before the written comment period closes on March 23, 2026.

New Standardized PAGA Notice Form
Under existing law, before filing a PAGA action, an employee must provide written notice to both the LWDA and the employer which identifies the specific Labor Code provisions allegedly violated and describes the actual “facts and theories” supporting the alleged violations. Courts have held that bare or conclusory allegations are insufficient.

The proposed regulations would significantly formalize this notice condition by requiring PAGA plaintiffs to use a standardized PAGA notice form prescribed by the agency which would require detailed background information regarding the employee’s employment, including dates of employment, job position, work location and the specific violations the employee claims to have personally suffered.

The regulations would also expressly clarify that conclusory or boilerplate allegations, or merely paraphrasing statutory language would be insufficient, and notices must provide a short and plain statement of the factual basis supporting each alleged violation. In addition, employees or their counsel would be required to certify that claims are not presented for an improper purpose and have legal and evidentiary support, mirroring the certification standards applied to court filings.

For employers, a standardized form and heightened factual specificity may provide clearer insight into the scope of alleged violations and stronger grounds to challenge deficient or unsupported notices.

New Safeguards Targeting “High-Volume” and “Vexatious” Filers
The proposed regulations also introduce, for the first time, formal controls aimed at what the LWDA characterizes as high-volume and abusive filing practices by subjecting “high-frequency filers” to additional requirements, including providing a cover letter disclosing that designation and obtaining a signed certification from the employee confirming review of the notice and the factual allegations asserted. The regulations would define a “high-frequency filer” as an attorney or law firm that has filed 200 or more PAGA notices in the preceding 12 months. According to the LWDA, eight law firms and four attorneys would have met the high-frequency threshold during fiscal year 2024–2025, collectively accounting for more than a third of all PAGA notices filed during the period.

The proposed regulations would also authorize the LWDA to designate a person or attorney as a “vexatious filer” after notice and an opportunity to respond. A vexatious filer could be subject to a prefiling screening order requiring the LWDA to review proposed PAGA notices for compliance before they are formally accepted for filing. The agency would also maintain a publicly accessible list of individuals designated as high-frequency or vexatious filers.

The LWDA states that these measures are intended to deter filing practices that undermine the administrative notice process and to address repetitive or template-driven notices. For employers, these provisions may provide additional procedural protection against serial filings and greater transparency regarding frequent PAGA filers.

Formalizing Expanded Cure Procedures
The 2024 amendments to PAGA expanded administrative cure opportunities, particularly for small employers and for certain wage statement violations but left many procedural details undefined. After the 2024 PAGA reforms, two separate administrative cure procedures became available to employers to resolve certain types of alleged violations before a lawsuit may be filed. One is a more streamlined process available to “small employers” for curing certain types of wage and hour violations commonly alleged in PAGA notices, e.g., overtime, meal and rest period and business reimbursement, among others. The other process is available to all employers where the only violation to be cured involves a violation of wage statement requirements under Labor Code Section 226.

The 2024 PAGA amendments cure mechanism for small employers with fewer than 100 employees left many questions, such as which employers could avail themselves of this opportunity, and how to procedurally do so. The proposed regulations propose to resolve these questions, by: (1) defining the 100-employee count to include all employees (exempt and nonexempt, permanent and temporary) at any location within the preceding year period; and (2) explaining the process for curing, including outlining what must be included in the employer’s cure statement, what happens if the LWDA determines a hearing is necessary to evaluate the proposed cure, how employees may challenge cure plans and the timing within which employers must complete all cure actions. The rules would also clarify eligibility calculations, required documentation, service procedures and administrative tolling.

The 2024 PAGA amendments provides a streamlined process for employers of any size for alleged wage statement violations when itemization is the only violation at issue. The proposed regulations would formalize that cure process, specifying content requirements for cure notices, deadlines for employee disputes and structured review procedures by the LWDA.

It should be noted that the proposed rules do not expand the statutory right to cure. Rather, they provide procedural structure to the cure mechanisms created by the Legislature in 2024. For employers, this additional clarity may increase predictability in the administrative process. At the same time, the formalized procedures and documentation requirements may require more careful preparation when pursuing cure options within the statutory deadlines.

The proposed regulations also provide evidentiary protection for employer cure activities under Evidence Code Section 1152.

Expanded Settlement Oversight and Reporting Requirements
PAGA requires a plaintiff to submit a proposed settlement agreement to the LWDA at the same time it is submitted to the court for approval. The statute, however, does not specify how the agency must review settlements or how long that review may take.

The proposed regulations would require that the LWDA be provided at least 45 days to review a proposed settlement agreement before court approval. Parties would need to submit not only the settlement agreement itself, but also the full motion for approval and all supporting declarations and documents filed with the court to the LWDA. Notably, the regulations further clarify that the LWDA’s silence may not be construed as approval of the settlement. The LWDA’s proposed increased oversight raises questions regarding what happens if the LWDA rejects a proposed settlement.

In addition, a settling plaintiff would be required to provide notice of the proposed settlement to other employees with pending PAGA claims against the same employer, including the case information and hearing date. The LWDA explains that this requirement is intended to address concerns regarding “top filing” and “reverse auction” scenarios, in which overlapping PAGA actions may be resolved in a manner that affects other pending claims. Here again, the proposed regulation raises significant questions about what happens if another PAGA litigant objects to the settlement.

To prevent the practice of expanding the scope of release at the settlement stage to extinguish claims asserted in other pending PAGA matters, the new regulations would also prohibit an employee from filing an amended PAGA notice adding new violations after reaching a proposed settlement in a pending civil action. This is concerning since it is often the case that the parties to settlement negotiations may agree to amend the PAGA notice and/or complaint following arm’s length negotiations where new allegations uncovered during the discovery process are discussed and resolved at mediation that were not included in the original PAGA notice and/or complaint.

Finally, the regulations would provide that a private agreement entered after a PAGA notice is filed—but before a PAGA complaint is filed—may not release PAGA claims belonging to the State or other employees.

Collectively, these changes would materially formalize and expand the agency’s oversight of PAGA settlements. For employers, the new requirements may extend settlement timelines, increase disclosure obligations, and force greater coordination among parallel PAGA plaintiffs.

What Employers Should Consider
The proposed regulations would formalize key aspects of PAGA administration, adding structure to notice requirements, cure procedures and settlement review. The new high-frequency and vexatious filer provisions may deter repetitive filings and increase transparency regarding serial PAGA plaintiffs. At the same time, the expanded settlement reporting requirements—including the 45-day LWDA review period, additional disclosure obligations and required notice to parallel PAGA plaintiffs—may extend resolution timelines and reduce flexibility in structuring settlements.

Because these regulations are proposed—not final—employers and industry groups have the opportunity to submit written comments before the comment period closes on March 23, 2026. Employers with active or anticipated PAGA litigation may wish to evaluate how the proposed rules could affect notice challenges, cure decisions and settlement strategy.

Pillsbury’s Employment Law team is available to assist clients in preparing comments, assessing the impact of the proposed rules on pending matters and developing forward-looking PAGA response strategies. We will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as the rulemaking process proceeds.