Hate To Be Mean, PAGA Plaintiffs Can't Intervene

California employment practitioners have fought for years over whether a plaintiff averring a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action can intervene in a separate PAGA action not brought by that plaintiff. Fight no more; Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc. resolves the split. In Turrieta, the Supreme Court of California held that a plaintiff who files a PAGA action cannot intervene in another plaintiff's ongoing PAGA action, even if both cases assert overlapping claims. The court ruled that only the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) and trial courts have the authority to review and approve proposed settlements.

Background

Before PAGA, only the LWDA could pursue and recover civil penalties for California Labor Code violations. However, since its enactment, PAGA permits "aggrieved employees" to file lawsuits on California's behalf against employers to recover civil penalties for California Labor Code wage and hour violations. These law enforcement