On Monday, Uber, Postmates and two of their drivers filed a lawsuit in federal court in the Central District of California, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and a determination that AB-5 is unconstitutional. AB-5 is set to become effective on Wednesday, January 1st and will have a major impact on California’s freelance workforce as well … Continue Reading
On January 1, 2020, California’s new worker classification law known as Assembly Bill 5 (“AB 5”), goes into effect. AB 5 codifies the three-factor “ABC” test adopted by the California Supreme Court in its 2018 Dynamex decision. The bulk of newly added Section 2750.3 of the California Labor Code describes the various categories of workers … Continue Reading
Gonzales v. San Gabriel Transit, Inc., 2019 WL 4942213 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) Francisco Gonzales filed this putative class action against his former employer, San Gabriel Transit (“SGT”), alleging that he and 550 other drivers were misclassified as independent contractors rather than employees. The trial court denied class certification on the ground that Gonzales had … Continue Reading
Assembly Bill 5, a proposed new law currently pending in the California legislature, would limit and codify last year’s California Supreme Court Dynamex opinion. If passed and signed into law by Gov. Newsom (he’s already said he’ll sign it), AB-5 would make it nearly impossible for most California employers to hire an independent contractor and … Continue Reading
We invite you to review our newly-posted May 2019 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include: Strict Independent Contractor Test Applies Retroactively; California Employee Is Compelled To Litigate His Employment Claims In Indiana; Employee Could Rely Upon Former Supervisor’s Statement About Existence Of Discrimination; … Continue Reading
Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int’l, 2019 WL 1945001 (9th Cir. 2019) Last year, the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Ops. W. Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), adopted the so-called “ABC test” for determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor and in so doing made it much more difficult … Continue Reading
Last year, we questioned whether California’s new restrictions on independent contractors would apply retroactively. Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit decided in Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int’l, 2019 WL 1945001 (9th Cir. 2019), that the landmark ruling in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court should be applied retroactively. The new test established in Dynamex upended the Borello test, … Continue Reading
We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2019 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include: Eddie Money Beats Discrimination Lawsuit Based On Free Speech Right; Former Accountant Could Proceed With Whistleblower Lawsuit; Employer Violated FCRA With Improper Background Check Notice; Fruit Growers May … Continue Reading
Duffey v. Tender Heart Home Care Agency, LLC, 31 Cal. App. 5th 232 (2019) Nichelle Duffey sued Tender Heart Home Care Agency for employment-related wage and hour claims such as unpaid overtime under the California Domestic Worker Bill of Rights (“DWBR,” Cal. Labor Code §§ 1450, et seq.). The trial court granted Tender Heart’s motion … Continue Reading
The Los Angeles Times published a piece addressing the recent and abrupt change in the rules for determining who is and who is not an independent contractor in California. As is so often the case, there are many unanticipated consequences associated with these new rules. Read the full piece here: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dynamex-contractors-20190223-story.html… Continue Reading
McCleery v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2018 WL 6583916 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018) Plaintiffs/property inspectors alleged they were improperly hired as independent contractors by insurance companies and sought payment of unpaid minimum wages, overtime, meal and rest breaks, employee expense reimbursements as well as compliance with various other Labor Code provisions. The trial court concluded that … Continue Reading
On May 1, we reported about the Dynamex Operations W., Inc. v. Superior Court opinion in which the California Supreme Court adopted a new standard (the “ABC test”) for determining if a worker may properly be classified as an employee or independent contractor. Last Monday, the California Court of Appeal clarified that the “ABC” test … Continue Reading
Linton v. DeSoto Cab Co., 15 Cal. App. 5th 1208 (2017) DeSoto Cab Co. had required Darnice Linton to pay a “gate fee” in exchange for his obtaining a taxicab to drive for each of his shifts. Linton alleged that he is an employee (not an independent contractor) and that by charging him “gate fees,” … Continue Reading
Jones v. Royal Admin. Servs., 2017 WL 3401317 (9th Cir. 2017) Charles Jones and Josh Watson (individuals whose cell phones are registered on the national do-no-call registry) sued Royal Administration Services for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for calls that were made by telemarketers who were employed by All American Auto Protection (“AAAP”), … Continue Reading
Local TV, LLC v. Superior Court, 3 Cal. App. 5th 1 (2016) Kurt Knutsson, a technology reporter who created “Kurt the CyberGuy” video segments for use on television news programs and station websites, sued Local TV for the use by its stations of CyberGuy material. Although Knutsson had entered into a written agreement pursuant to … Continue Reading
Davis v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 245 Cal. App. 4th 1302 (2016) William A. Davis brought suit against Farmers, claiming he had been wrongfully classified as an independent contractor rather than an employee and asserting that he had been wrongfully terminated on the basis of his age. The trial court directed a verdict in Farmers’s favor … Continue Reading
Garcia v. Seacon Logix, Inc., 190 Cal. Rptr. 3d 400 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) Romeo Garcia and other plaintiffs were truck drivers who transported cargo for Seacon Logix. After the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach began to implement a clean air program, which prohibited older trucks from accessing the ports, companies such as … Continue Reading
People v. Pac Anchor Transp., Inc., 2014 WL 3702674 (Cal. S. Ct. 2014) The People on behalf of the State of California filed this unfair competition law (“UCL”) action against Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc., for misclassifying drivers as independent contractors and for other alleged violations of California labor and unemployment insurance laws. In response, Pac … Continue Reading
Alexander v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc., 2014 WL 4211107 (9th Cir. 2014) In this class action the named plaintiffs represent approximately 2,300 individuals who were full-time delivery drivers for FedEx in California between 2000 and 2007. FedEx characterizes its drivers as independent contractors in its Operating Agreement. Similar cases to this one were filed … Continue Reading
Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc., 2014 WL 2924954 (Cal. S. Ct. 2014) Plaintiffs Maria Ayala, Rosa Duran and Osman Nuñez sought to certify a class of newspaper home delivery carriers in a lawsuit brought against Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc. (“AVN”), alleging that AVN had improperly classified the carriers as independent contractors rather than employees … Continue Reading
On Monday, June 30, 2014, the California Supreme Court handed down its decision in Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, a lawsuit brought on behalf of a group of newspaper delivery carriers who alleged that they had been misclassified as independent contractors instead of employees. The trial court had initially denied certification, finding that common issues … Continue Reading
Bradley v. Networkers Int’l, LLC, 2012 WL 6182473 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) The three named plaintiffs in this case were among approximately 140 skilled workers retained by Networkers to provide repair and installation services at cell sites. Each worker was required to sign a standard contract, which stated that he or she was an independent … Continue Reading
Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics Corp., 667 F.3d 1318 (9th Cir. 2012) Fernando Ruiz and similarly situated drivers filed a class action against Affinity alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and California law for failure to pay overtime, failure to pay wages, improper charges for workers’ compensation insurance and unfair business practices. To work … Continue Reading
Arnold v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 202 Cal. App. 4th 580 (2011) Kimbly Arnold filed a complaint against Mutual of Omaha on her behalf and on behalf of a putative class of similarly situated “licensed agents” and “sales representatives” of the company, alleging violations of the California Labor Code, including provisions governing expense reimbursement … Continue Reading
