Overview
Title
To establish the Payroll Audit Independent Determination program in the Department of Labor.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 2299 wants to help workers get paid what they are owed by having companies check their own payrolls to find any mistakes and fix them, all while making sure that the workers keep their rights to say yes or no to any deals.
Summary AI
H.R. 2299, also known as the "Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025," aims to establish the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program within the Department of Labor. This program encourages employers to voluntarily self-audit and resolve any unintentional violations of wage laws, like minimum wage and overtime pay, by cooperating with the Department of Labor. The bill specifies that employers who participate in this self-audit program can correct any identified issues without the fear of subsequent investigations. Additionally, it safeguards employees' rights by allowing them the choice to accept or decline any settlements proposed by their employers.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill titled the "Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025" aims to formalize a program in the Department of Labor called the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program. This program assists employers in remedying accidental violations of wage laws by allowing them to voluntarily settle unpaid wages or overtime compensation with employees. This initiative is designed to encourage employers to self-audit and resolve wage disputes efficiently.
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation seeks to establish a permanent framework for the PAID program initially launched as a pilot by the Department of Labor in 2018. The intention is to enable employers to collaborate voluntarily with the Department to correct inadvertent violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Employers are encouraged to perform self-audits and possibly settle back wages owed to employees without risking litigation or penalties. The bill outlines specific criteria for employer participation, including submitting detailed documentation of the self-audit process and demonstrating previous compliance with labor laws.
Summary of Significant Issues
One notable issue in the bill is the exclusion of certain employees from protection under the program. Employees under specific visa programs and acts like H-1B, H-2B, H-2A, the Davis-Bacon Act, and the Service Contract Act are omitted. This exclusion could lead to inequities and may have political and legal ramifications concerning worker rights. Furthermore, the bill’s definition of "good faith" is vague, allowing room for inconsistent application and interpretation, potentially leading to fairness concerns.
Transparency also poses a significant issue. The bill protects information submitted during the application process from discovery without employer consent. This may raise ethical concerns over employee protection and access to justice, implying that the program might favor employer interests over worker rights. Additionally, the application process demands extensive documentation, presenting a barrier that might deter potential employers from engaging due to its complexity.
Potential Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill could streamline rectification of wage violations, potentially leading to faster resolution and compensation for affected employees. It might encourage compliance and accountability among employers, reducing the frequency of wage law violations. On the downside, it could also leave certain categories of employees without recourse to address similar violations due to their exclusion from the program.
Impact on Stakeholders
Among employers, particularly those with good compliance records, the bill may be seen positively as it offers a mechanism to address past inadvertent errors without fear of penalties or litigation. By self-auditing and correcting mistakes, businesses can maintain good standing and focus on their operations.
For employees, the impact is mixed. On one hand, those included under the program might benefit from timely wage settlements. However, the exclusion of certain worker categories limits comprehensive protection, leaving some employees more vulnerable to ongoing wage violations without the same opportunities for redress.
For regulatory bodies such as the Department of Labor, the bill might streamline administrative processes by reducing litigation costs and focusing resources on egregious offenders rather than accidental violations. However, the lack of transparency and possible favoritism towards employers could draw criticism from labor advocacy groups advocating for stronger employee protections.
Overall, while the bill presents a constructive step toward improving employer compliance and wage repayment efficiency, its effectiveness will depend on addressing the noted issues, particularly concerning transparency, equitable employee protection, and application process barriers.
Financial Assessment
The Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025—H.R. 2299—seeks to establish the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program within the Department of Labor. Key financial elements of this proposal focus on the financial restitution mechanisms for employees affected by payroll inaccuracies.
Financial Restitution Outcomes
The most prominent monetary aspect of the bill is its reference to the financial outcomes achieved by the PAID pilot program. Between April 1, 2018, and September 15, 2019, a total of $4,131,238 in back wages was paid to 7,429 employees through case resolutions. On average, PAID pilot program cases paid $55,828 in back wages per case, a figure significantly higher than the average for other compliance actions. These statistics emphasize the program's effectiveness in recovering back wages efficiently and may serve to justify the expansion of the PAID program under the new act.
Efficiency and Financial Implications
Analysis of the PAID pilot program outcomes revealed that it distributed back wages substantially more efficiently, both in terms of monetary amounts and the number of employees benefited. For example, the average back wages paid per enforcement hour in PAID cases were $2,864, compared to just $279 for other compliance actions. Additionally, the pilot program managed to recover wages for almost 10 times more employees per case than traditional methods. This efficiency suggests a significant financial benefit for employees, allowing them quicker access to owed wages.
Concerns Related to Financial Fairness
Despite the positive financial outcome presented, there are issues regarding the exclusion of certain groups of employees from this program. Notably, employees under specific visa and labor acts are not considered "affected employees." This exclusion raises potential legal and financial fairness concerns, as employees in these categories might not receive the same restitution benefits. Consequently, this could lead to inequities in financial justice for such employees, which may spark significant political and legal debate.
Financial Information Transparency
The bill also includes provisions that exempt information submitted by employers during self-audits from being used in future investigations or discovered in court proceedings without employer consent. This approach may protect employers financially but raises concerns about transparency and accountability. Such exclusions could be perceived as an imbalance, potentially limiting employees' ability to claim full financial restitution through court action.
In conclusion, while the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025 outlines an efficient framework for recovering wages, notable issues surrounding transparency and equitable financial treatment of all workers suggest room for further evaluation. This is critical not only to ensure fair financial practices but also to maintain trust and accountability in labor and wage standards enforcement.
Issues
The definition of 'affected employee' in Section 3 excludes employees under specific visa programs and acts (like H-1B, H-2B, H-2A, Davis-Bacon Act, and Service Contract Act). This exclusion could create inequities in protection for these employees, potentially leading to significant political and legal implications regarding worker rights.
The term 'good faith' in Section 3 is not well-defined and could be subject to interpretation, which might lead to inconsistent application of the Payroll Audit Independent Determination program. This may result in legal challenges due to perceived biases.
The Payroll Audit Independent Determination program outlined in Section 4 exempts submitted application information from discovery in court without employer consent, raising significant transparency and ethical concerns, especially regarding employee protection and fair access to justice.
Significant financial and ethical implications arise from the program favoring employers through the exemption from discovery and the prohibition against utilizing application information for investigations, unless specific conditions are met (Section 4). This could be perceived as prioritizing employer protection over employee rights.
Section 2 highlights the PAID pilot program's efficiency claims without a detailed analysis of why such results were achieved, which could lead to misunderstandings or skepticism about the program's validity and whether it can be justified financially and ethically in its purported benefits.
The language in the application requirements of Section 4 is complex and might deter employer participation due to extensive documentation. This could reduce the overall effectiveness and breadth of program engagement, weakening its intended impacts.
The program in Section 4 requires employers to have a clean record for the past 5 years, which could be too restrictive and limit employer participation, especially those who may have minor or unrelated past infractions but are otherwise compliant.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this act gives it the official name of the “Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025.”
2. Findings Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress found that the Department of Labor's Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) pilot program helped employers fix accidental violations of wage laws, resulting in faster and larger wage repayments to employees compared to traditional methods. The program, which ran from 2018 to 2019, increased the average amount of back wages paid and involved more employees per case while cutting down on the time needed to resolve these issues.
Money References
- Between April 1, 2018, and September 15, 2019, the Wage and Hour Division concluded 74 PAID pilot program cases, representing less than one percent of all compliance actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, with a total of $4,131,238 in back wages paid to 7,429 employees through such PAID pilot program cases.
- In fact, during the period described in paragraph (5)— (A) the average back wages paid per case for PAID pilot program cases ($55,828) were more than 4 times the average back wages paid per compliance action ($11,355); (B) the average back wages paid per enforcement hour for PAID pilot program cases ($2,864) was more than 10 times greater than the average back wages paid per enforcement hour for compliance actions ($279); (C) on average, nearly 10 times more employees received back wages in each PAID pilot program case than in investigations conducted using traditional methods; (D) self-audits through the PAID pilot program averaged 19 hours per case as compared to 41 hours per case for the Secretary conducted using traditional methods; and (E) self-audits through the PAID pilot program reached employers that the Wage and Hour Division would not typically prioritize for enforcement, including government establishments and industry sectors with higher-wage occupations.
3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section defines specific terms used in the Act, such as what constitutes an "affected employee," who the "Administrator" is, and what the terms "employee," "employer," "good faith," "Secretary," and "self-audit" mean. These definitions help clarify who is involved and what actions are meant by certain words in the context of following labor standards and wage laws.
4. Payroll Audit Independent Determination program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section establishes a program to help employers who accidentally violate labor laws fix their mistakes by paying owed wages, without facing punishment. Employers must review resources, verify compliance, and submit relevant audit results and assurances, while approved applications allow for settlements without extra payments or expanded investigations.