Justice Liu emphasized that the holding deprives trial courts of hearing from plaintiffs whose participation would ensure fair deals and deprives appellate courts of the opportunity to weigh challenges.
“Taken together, the court’s decision creates a substantial risk of auctioning the settlement of representative PAGA claims to the lowest bidder and insulating those settlements from appellate review,” Justice Liu wrote.
Justice Liu further noted, “Today’s opinion steers PAGA into avoidable shoals, and the unfortunate result calls for legislative attention, lest the statute’s goal of strengthening labor code enforcement be thwarted by settlement incentives that drive a race to the bottom.”
Implications and Future Amendments
Thursday’s decision aligns with the leaning of Justice Joshua P. Groban, who during oral arguments in May, expressed that allowing Olson and Seifu to intervene could theoretically lead to “conflicting” positions.
The dispute stems from respective cases that Turrieta, Olson, and Seifu each filed against Lyft in 2018, alleging misclassification. In Seifu’s case, a California court of appeal ruled in the driver’s favor in March 2023. Lyft sought a review by the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to do so in June.
PAGA Deal Drivers Trial : Recent Developments
This ruling is the latest development in PAGA Deal Drivers Trial cases. In 2022 and 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court, respectively, ruled on the arbitration of claims under the statute. Then, in June, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state Legislature announced they would amend the law ahead of a proposed ballot measure that sought to eliminate it completely.
