Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc.: Plaintiffs Compelled To Arbitrate Their Individual PAGA Claims May Still Litigate Representative PAGA Claims

TAKEAWAYS

• To have Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) standing, a plaintiff must be an "aggrieved employee," which is an individual who worked for an alleged violator and personally sustained at least one Labor Code violation.
• Departing from the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of California law in the 2022 Viking River case, the California Supreme Court ruled that a plaintiff does not lose standing to litigate non-individual representative PAGA claims in court when the plaintiff's individual claims are subject to mandatory arbitration.
• Employers should carefully review their arbitration agreements and settlement release language in PAGA actions.

In Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., the California Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs who have been compelled to arbitrate their own individual Labor Code violations under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA), Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq., continue to have standing to pursue other employees'