Law360 Employment Authority asked wage and hour attorneys on both sides of the bar a straightforward question: what do you want to see change in the rest of 2026? The resulting piece drew from management-side and worker-side lawyers across the country. MSD Lawyers partner Camron Dowlatshahi was one of the attorneys featured, and his answer focused on a gap in California law that shapes the outcome of nearly every large wage case in the state.
At MSD Lawyers, we represent California employees in wage and hour class actions and Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims. Here is what the article covered and what Camron told Law360.
What Wage and Hour Attorneys Want in 2026
The article grouped attorney responses into three themes.
The first was artificial intelligence. Employers increasingly use AI tools to track hours, assign work, and evaluate performance, and attorneys on both sides said the absence of a federal baseline leaves employers and employees guessing. Automated time review can also miss pre-shift work that employees are legally owed.
The second was collective action certification under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Federal circuits have split on how collectives get certified and on who is eligible to join, which means outcomes under a single federal statute now depend heavily on where a case is filed.
The third was the relationship between federal and state wage law, including how far state statutes incorporate federal limitations.
Camron Dowlatshahi on California’s Missing First-to-File Rule
In federal court, the first-to-file rule gives priority to the earlier-filed case when two lawsuits cover overlapping claims. California has no equivalent rule for wage and hour class actions or for representative claims brought under the PAGA.
Camron told Law360 that the absence of a priority rule creates a structural problem:
- On the current landscape: He described the situation in blunt terms. “Right now, it’s completely the Wild West.”
- On the incentive it creates: Without a priority rule, he said, firms have an incentive to cut deals with defendants, and defendants can shop deals to parties who filed later.
- On what a rule would fix: A clear standard would establish whether filing first carries the right to negotiate exclusively with the defendant, or at least carries priority.
Why This Matters for California Workers
When multiple overlapping cases are pending against the same employer, the employer decides who it negotiates with. That decision does not have to favor the strongest case. It can favor whichever plaintiff will accept the least.
The consequence falls on workers who are not in the room. A settlement approved in a weaker parallel case can carry a release that reaches employees who never filed anything and never had a say. PAGA raises the same concern in a different form, because PAGA claims are brought on behalf of the state and a penalty settlement can bind claims well beyond the named plaintiff.
A first-to-file rule would not resolve every dispute between competing firms. It would establish an order, and that order is what protects the value of a worker’s claim.
Have you been underpaid, misclassified, or denied meal and rest breaks? Contact MSD Lawyers today for a free consultation to speak with an experienced wage and hour attorney.
Read the full Law360 Employment Authority article (subscription required)
