GT

Subscribe to GT

Whether the 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Thole vs. U.S. Bank on June 1 is “good news” for employers and will limit lawsuits by defined benefit participants, as some commentators…
Continue Reading Greenberg Traurig Attorneys Jeffrey Mamorsky and Jonathan Sulds’ Pen ERISA Column in Pensions and Investments

What do a gay child-welfare advocate from Georgia, a transgender funeral home employee from Michigan, and a gay skydiving instructor from New York have in common? According to the Supreme…
Continue Reading Supreme Court Rules Title VII protects LGBT+ Employees from Workplace Discrimination: Practical Implications for Employers

As noted in our 2019 legislative update, New Jersey and New York have joined a growing number of states in prohibiting employers from asking job applicants about their salary…
Continue Reading New York, New Jersey Employers Now Prohibited From Inquiring About Salary History

On Jan. 15, 2020, the California Supreme Court granted, and then deferred further action on, the appeal of a lower appellate court’s opinion in Gonzales v. San Gabriel Transit, Inc. pending its disposition of Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int’l, Inc., which takes up the common issue of whether the Dynamex decision applies retroactively.

Last year, the governor of California signed Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) into law, which codified and clarified the California Supreme Court case Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles. The ABC test established in Dynamex dramatically changed the standard for determining whether workers in California should be classified as employees or as independent contractors. Under the ABC test, a hiring entity must prove that a worker is in fact an independent contractor by demonstrating: (A) the worker is free from the control and direction of the hirer in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of such work and in fact; (B) the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business, and (C) the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hiring entity. San Gabriel Transit, Inc. is one of several AB 5-related cases before state and federal courts in California that have workers, employers, and trade associations hotter than 1.21 gigawatts. While lawsuits filed by “gig economy” drivers, truck drivers (CTA preliminary injunction granted in USDC- Southern District) and freelance journalists (American Society of Journalists and Authors, Inc. and National Press Photographers Association lawsuit filed in USDC- Central District) present an existential threat to AB 5 in the long run, the California Supreme Court will likely decide the retroactivity issue in Jan-Pro Franchising Int’l and San Gabriel Transit, Inc. this year. The impact of the rulings in both cases will extend up and down the Golden State, and employers, especially franchisors (See GT Alert, AB 5 Update, Sept. 24, 2019), and their counsel should be prepared.
Continue Reading AB 5 Update: The California Supreme Court Will Likely Decide if Dynamex Is Retro in 2020