Violante

Violante v. Communities Southwest Development & Construction Co.

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 4th 972·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 560·2006 Daily Journal DAR 4585·41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 673·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3209
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 16, 2006No. E037333California2,504 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Gaut, J.

1. Introduction

We hold that a subcontractor’s employee on a public works project cannot sue the prime or general contractor on theories of statutory or contractual liability for the nonpayment of prevailing wages by the subcontractor, the employee’s direct employer. Although both sides on this issue have advanced compelling public policy arguments in favor of their respective positions, we deem those more appropriate for legislative rather than judicial consideration. (California Teachers Assn. v. Governing Bd. of Rialto Unified School Dist. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 627, 632 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 671 , 927 P.2d 1175 ]; Crusader Insurance Co. v. Scottsdale Insurance Co. (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 121, 134 [ 62 Cal.Rptr.2d 620 ].) Our review of the statutory scheme governing prevailing wages finds no private right of action for enforcement by a subcontractor’s employee against other parties than the subcontractor. In addition, we reject plaintiffs’ theories of recovery based on principles of third party breach of contract and unfair competition.

Plaintiffs are construction workers seeking to launch a class action against defendants for recovery of prevailing wages. Plaintiffs appeal from…

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.