Wage-theft civil remedy fails in committee after contested testimony from workers and business groups

Senate Bill 600, introduced by Senator Greg Letting, sought to create a civil pathway for workers to recover unpaid wages commonly described in testimony as "wage theft." Letting told the committee the bill would require employers to pay any wages earned within two days of separation and authorize penalties up to $1,000 for failure to do so.

Supporters who testified included Mike Karsis, a board member with the Center for the Workers and Their Rights and an employment-law attorney, who described a pattern of misclassification, unpaid overtime and administrative delays that make it difficult for low-wage workers to secure relief through existing enforcement channels. "By the time the agency takes up a case, the worker is very frustrated with us," Karsis said, citing enforcement gaps and academic work by University of Arkansas law professor Annie Smith.

Marshallese community witnesses described employer practices they said worsened the problem: payments routed to employer-selected debit-card accounts that impose ATM or withdrawal fees, lack of pay stubs, delayed HR responses and fear of retaliation for reporting. One witness described repeated delays in receiving pay stubs and use of employer-linked cards that charge multiple small fees on withdrawals.

Opponents included Randy Zook of the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce, who told the committee such problems are rare and urged reliance on existing wage-and-hour laws and enforcement mechanisms. Committee members questioned witnesses about past litigation; Karsis said class actions and other cases have occurred but some settlements are confidential and some Department of Labor complaints remain pending.

After members closed debate — with the sponsor urging that low-income hourly workers lack resources to pursue long court fights — a member moved that the bill "do pass." The motion failed for lack of a second and the bill did not advance from committee. The transcript indicates the bill was defeated for want of a second rather than by recorded vote.

The hearing included questions about enforcement capacity, the difference between wage-and-hour statutes and a standalone wage-theft law, and empirical claims about tax and welfare impacts of unpaid wages. No amendment or alternative enforcement mechanism was adopted in committee.