As we reported in our blog discussing an LASC judge striking down a law that required California companies to have racially diverse boards (AB 979): Judge Rules That Race and
Continue Reading Judge Rules That Gender Quotas for Corporate Board Members Violate the California Constitution
There might be a light flickering at the end of a dark tunnel California employers have been walking through for more than 15 years. In December 2021, California’s Secretary of
Continue Reading At Long Last: The End of the PAGA Era?
Continue Reading 5 Trends to Watch in California Labor & Employment Law 2022
In true California fashion, the legislature had a busy session that resulted in a number of new employment-related statutes and amendments being passed just in time for the holidays and
Continue Reading California Employers Will Ring in The New Year With More Coal Than Presents
On Sept. 28, 2021, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 606 (SB 606), which, among other things, creates two new categories of California Division of
Continue Reading Cal/OSHA to California Employers: Get It Right or Pay the Price
Over the past few years, California has enacted legislation that requires public companies in California to meet certain diversity metrics with respect to their boards of directors. These board-specific requirements
Continue Reading More than a “Board” Game: How Companies Thrive with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
On Sept. 17, 2020, the governor of California signed into law new workplace notice requirements and enforcement procedures in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. These new requirements
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