Tanguilig

Tanguilig v. Bloomingdale's, Inc.

Good Law
2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 992·210 Cal. Rptr. 3d 352·5 Cal. App. 5th 665·27 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 35
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 16, 2016A145283California5,040 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bruiniers, J.

Bernadette Tanguilig, an employee at Bloomingdale’s, Inc. (Bloomingdale’s), filed a representative action on behalf of herself and fellow employees pursuant to the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA) (Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq.), alleging several Labor Code violations by the company. Bloomingdale’s moved to compel arbitration of Tanguilig’s “individual PAGA claim” and stay or dismiss the remainder of the complaint. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm. Under Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348 [ 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 289 , 327 P.3d 129 ] (Iskanian) and consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) ( 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.), a PAGA representative claim is nonwaivable by a plaintiff-employee via a predispute arbitration agreement with an employer, and a PAGA claim (whether individual or representative) cannot be ordered to arbitration without the state’s consent.

I. Legal Framework

Because this case turns on a proper understanding of PAGA and application of Supreme Court precedent, we begin with pertinent passages from Iskanian discussing these issues: “ ‘In September 2003, the Legislature enacted [PAGA]…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.