The California legislature is setting its sights on limiting employers’ use of independent contractors in the gig economy. A California bill, AB 5, sets to codify the California Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Dynamex v. Superior Court. The bill passed the Assembly last week, and will need to be approved by both the Senate
The California Supreme Court issued a monumental ruling this week regarding the test used in determining whether a worker can be classified as an independent contractor. In the case, Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, the plaintiff brought a class action complaint alleging five causes of action arising from Dynamex’s alleged misclassification of
This week, a federal court in northern California certified portions of a class action 
brought by Uber drivers who worked in California since 2009 (click here for the decision [PDF]). Over 160,000 drivers have worked for Uber in California during this time period, and while the case is making a lot of news,
Earlier this week Uber appealed a California Labor Commissioner ruling against it holding that a driver was misclassified as an independent contractor. In this video, I briefly discuss the ruling and the lesson it holds for employers.
Misclassification of employees as independent contractors can carry many damages and penalties. For example, Sections 226.8 and
The new decision in Beaumont-Jacques v. Farmers Group examines the test in determining a worker’s independent contractor status. In applying the “economic realities” test set forth by the California Supreme Court in S.G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Dept. of Industrial Relations, the Court focused on whether the worker had “meaningful discretion with reference