California Senate Bill SB648

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/25
• Refer: 3/5/25
• Report Pass: 4/9/25
• Refer: 4/9/25
• Report Pass: 4/23/25
• Refer: 4/23/25
• Report Pass: 5/23/25
• Engrossed: 5/29/25
• Refer: 6/5/25
• Report Pass: 6/26/25
• Refer: 6/26/25
• Report Pass: 7/2/25
• Refer: 7/2/25
• Report Pass: 7/9/25
• Enrolled: 7/17/25
• Chaptered: 7/30/25
• Passed: 7/30/25

Caption

An act to amend Section 351 of the Labor Code, relating to employment.

Summary

SB 648 amends Labor Code Section 351 to strengthen enforcement of California’s existing gratuity protections. Current law already bars employers or their agents from taking, withholding, or crediting employee tips against wages, and declares gratuities to be the sole property of the employee. The bill keeps those substantive protections in place and adds explicit authority for the Labor Commissioner to investigate suspected violations and to enforce the law by issuing citations or filing civil actions. The bill also confirms that when patrons leave tips by credit card, employers must pass through the full tip amount to employees without deducting credit card processing fees or related costs, and must pay those tips no later than the next regular payday after the card transaction is authorized. In practical terms, the measure gives the state a clearer enforcement tool against tip theft and delayed or reduced tip payments, especially in tipped-service workplaces such as restaurants and hospitality businesses.

Impact

SB 648 changes the enforcement mechanism for Labor Code Section 351 by expressly authorizing the Labor Commissioner to investigate gratuity violations and pursue citations or civil litigation under procedures tied to existing Labor Commissioner citation authority. It does not create a new tip-rights rule so much as it makes the existing rule more enforceable, which may increase compliance pressure on employers and agents who handle employee tips, including credit-card gratuities. The bill affects employers in tipped industries and reinforces employees’ property rights in gratuities under state wage-and-hour law.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have had broadly favorable support throughout the legislative process. It advanced through committees and floor votes with unanimous or near-unanimous approval, including multiple 0-yea, 0-nay committee votes and a 75-0 Senate floor vote on the consent calendar. The absence of recorded opposition in the available history suggests the measure was viewed as a straightforward worker-protection and enforcement bill rather than a controversial policy change.

Contention

No specific committee transcript or recorded opposition is provided, so there is little evidence of substantive contention in the available materials. Any potential concerns would likely have centered on employer compliance burdens, the handling of credit-card processing fees, or the expansion of Labor Commissioner enforcement authority, but those issues are not reflected in the vote record. The bill’s unanimous votes and consent-calendar treatment indicate that, whatever concerns may have existed, they did not generate visible legislative conflict.