Interactive Tool
PAGA Penalty Estimator
Models PAGA penalty exposure across seven violation categories with three output scenarios: plaintiff maximum, data-driven realistic, and defense best case. Supports pre-reform and post-reform penalty rates, the temporal bifurcation toggle for the 'Two Hotels' framework, derivative penalty stacking, weekly pay period halving under section 2699(o), and legacy/remedied period split analysis.
All calculations run in your browser. No data is transmitted or stored.
Penalties are calculated per employee, per pay period, per violation category using the statutory penalty rates under Labor Code sections 2699(f), 226(e), 558 and 1197.1 — except final-pay exposure, which accrues once per separated employee. Three of those are specific penalties the 2024 reform did not touch, because they are those statutes’ own schedules: section 226(e) at fifty dollars for the initial pay period and one hundred for each subsequent one, subject to its four-thousand-dollar per-employee aggregate cap; section 1197.1 at two hundred fifty dollars for a subsequent violation; and section 558 at fifty and one hundred dollars for a violation of any section of Part 2, Chapter 1 — the chapter that contains section 510, so overtime carries the same rate before and after the reform rather than the section 2699(f)(2) default. Violation rates are user-adjustable per category — the default rates represent common analytical assumptions, not empirical data from any specific matter. Post-reform rates reflect the default penalty reduction from $200 to $100 under AB 2288 section 2699(f)(2)(A). Derivative section 226 stacking is modeled as section 2699(i) writes it: barred for post-reform notices unless the violation was knowing and intentional or was a failure to provide a wage statement at all, controlled by an explicit predicate toggle rather than a hidden discount. When the penalty cap toggle is enabled, the 15% or 30% reduction is shown against each of the three scenarios; the settlement-allocation figures are computed from the capped plaintiff-maximum total, and the attorney-fee figure estimates one-third of the gross recovery. Categories carrying a specific statutory penalty are modeled at the subsequent-violation rate.
Interactive · Combined Exposure Estimator
Dual-track model: PAGA penalties + class action damages. Per-category violation rates, penalty cap integration, derivative stacking, and temporal bifurcation.
Post-Reform (June 19, 2024+)
$100 default penalty. $200 only for malicious/oppressive conduct or prior findings. Anti-stacking (§ 2699(i)). Penalty caps available.
Aggrieved Employees
50
Pay Periods (1-Year PAGA Lookback)
26 pay periods
Violation Categories · Per-Category Violation Rates
Meal Period
§ 226.7 · $100 (default)
$45,500
Rest Period
§ 226.7 · $100 (default)
$39,000
Wage Statement
§ 226(e) · $100 (specific)
Overtime / Regular Rate
§ 510 → § 558 · $100 (specific)
Expense Reimbursement
§ 2802 · $100 (default)
Minimum Wage
§ 1197.1 · $250 (specific)
Final Pay Timing
§§ 201/202 · $100 (default) · separated employees, once
Penalty Cap (§§ 2699(g), 2699(h))
Naranjo Derivative Stacking (barred by § 2699(i) absent a predicate)
Pre/Post Compliance Split
Class Action Damages Track
Weekly Pay Period (§ 2699(o))
Plaintiff Maximum
$84,500
Data-Driven Realistic
$50,700
Defense Best Case
$22,100
Before any penalty cap
Penalty Breakdown
Meal Period (§ 226.7) · 35% violation rate
$45,500
Rest Period (§ 226.7) · 30% violation rate
$39,000
Total Exposure
$84,500
Settlement Distribution (Post-Reform: 35% Employee / 65% LWDA)
Employee Share (35%)
$29,575
LWDA Share (65%)
$54,925
Attorney Fees (est. one-third of gross)
$27,885
Statutory fee-shifting under § 2699 is awarded on the action and paid in addition to the penalty distribution; one-third of the gross recovery is a common benchmark, not a rule.
For illustrative purposes only. Actual exposure depends on facts, evidence, and applicable defenses. Post-reform (notices filed June 19, 2024+): default penalty $100/employee/pay period (§ 2699(f)(2)(A)); $200 only for malicious/oppressive conduct or prior findings (§ 2699(f)(2)(B)). Penalty caps: 15% (§ 2699(g)(1)); 30% (§ 2699(h)(1)). Anti-stacking: § 2699(i) is a bar, not a discount — the stacked § 226 penalty is unavailable unless the violation was knowing or intentional or was a failure to provide a wage statement, and §§ 201–203 penalties cannot be collected in addition to the penalty for the same underlying unpaid wages on any showing. Weekly halving: § 2699(o), applied to per-pay-period penalties only. PAGA employee share: 35% (§ 2699(m)). Derivative stacking per Naranjo v. Spectrum Security (2022) 13 Cal.5th 93. Final-pay exposure accrues once per separated employee (assumed 30% of the workforce — adjust mentally for your facts). Attorney-fee figure is an estimate at one-third of gross; statutory fees are awarded on the action. "Two Hotels" temporal bifurcation is an analytical methodology, not a statutory framework. Class damages estimates are illustrative — actual damages require forensic payroll analysis. Prejudgment interest: 10% on unpaid wages (Lab. Code § 218.6; Civ. Code § 3289(b)); 7% on § 226.7 premiums (Naranjo (2022)).
Other Tools
Regular Rate Calculator
Ferra and Alvarado methodology
Penalty Cap Qualifier
15% and 30% documentation
Statute of Limitations Calculator
PAGA vs. underlying lookback
Recoverability Checker
ZB, N.A. category analysis
Derivative Penalty Mapper
Naranjo penalty cascade
PAGA Reform Decision Tree
Post-reform strategic routing
Wage Statement Compliance Checker
Nine elements of § 226(a)
For illustrative purposes only. This tool does not constitute legal advice.