[thereisnospork]

I don't understand your point? It is a simple concept that wage liabilities, eg a last check that bounces, or 'wage theft'[0], can result in those liabilities passing through to become personal liabilities of the company's owner(s).

Again IANAL, and ymmv based on specific circumstances, but piercing for unpaid wages is very much a thing in (at least) California law.

[0]an obviously illegal activity?

[s1artibartfast]

I understand what you said, I just don't think it is true and none of the provided sources say so. Meanwhile, everything I have read says they are simply priority creditors up to a limit. Beyond the limit, judges will pay other creditors before employees.

>Because claims for unpaid wages due to insolvency do not fall under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) unless the employer willfully failed to pay wages owed and filed for bankruptcy as an attempt to avoid paying wages, the U.S. Department of Labor has no jurisdiction in this area and will not accept claims.

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-...

[thereisnospork]

>I understand what you said,

You really don't seem to. The allowed recourse, under contention, for unpaid wages due to bankruptcy isn't via the FLSA, its a lawsuit against the company's owners. If you run a taco stand, don't pay your employee, and then declare bankrupcy - validly or not - you will plausibly be held liable, as person, not an LLC, in civil court for those wages. To be paid from your personal assets and or garnished from future income.

Also your quote literally says 'unless declaring bankruptcy to avoid paying wages.'

[s1artibartfast]

yes, and I am talking about the case of wages during/post bankruptcy.

I am not talking about the case of of declaring bankruptcy to avoid paying wages.