News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Misclassification

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

California Supreme Court Defines “Reasonable Effort” That is Required for a Good-Faith Defense to a Claim for Unpaid Wages

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP on

The California Supreme Court recently issued an opinion that serves as an important reminder to employers: good intentions regarding compliance with wage laws are not enough to avoid liquidated damages for minimum wage...more

Lewitt Hackman

Good Faith Requires Action: The New Standard for Employer Defense

Lewitt Hackman on

As defense attorneys, we often encounter matters where an employer’s good-faith mistake gives rise to wage and hour litigation. While ignorance of the law generally provides no defense, a good-faith mistake, historically...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

California Supreme Court raises bar for employers: “We didn’t know” is no defense

In a unanimous decision that strengthened California’s already robust worker protections laws, the state’s Supreme Court has made it harder for employers to avoid increased damages for minimum wage violations. The ruling in...more

Buchalter

Beauty is Pain: Lessons and Trends Impacting the Beauty Industry and Employment Law Concerns for 2025 and Beyond

Buchalter on

It was a normal, busy day at Young’s Nail Spa in Temecula, California, when the nail salon was abruptly hit with a $1.2 million fine by the California Labor Commissioner after an investigation found that 36 workers were...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

California’s Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 22 Allowing Gig Workers To Be Classified As Independent Contractors

Amundsen Davis LLC on

On July 25, 2024, CaliforniaCalifornia’s Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated ruling that allows app-based rideshare and delivery companies to classify drivers as independent contractors instead of employees, if certain...more

Kilpatrick

California Supreme Court holds plaintiffs required to arbitrate individual Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims maintain...

Kilpatrick on

The California Supreme Court recently rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of standing under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). In Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 532 P.3d 682 (Cal. 2023), the Court...more

MoFo Employment Law Commentary (ELC)

The California Supreme Court Clarifies PAGA Standing

On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (S274671, Cal. Jul. 2023), holding that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate claims under the Labor Code Private...more

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.

California Rejects Viking River, Allows PAGA Claims to Proceed

Recently, in Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc., the California Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who proceed to arbitration on individual labor code claims do not lose standing to bring representative claims in court under the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

California Supreme Court May Address Questions Left from Viking River Cruises in 2023

On July 20, 2022, the California Supreme Court granted review in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. G059860, which indicates that it may intend to address the questions of state law addressed by the...more

Fisher Phillips

The Top 17 Workplace Law Stories from May 2022

Fisher Phillips on

It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more

Fisher Phillips

The Top 14 Workplace Law Stories from January 2022

Fisher Phillips on

It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

AB 5 Past and Present – What You Need to Know

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

At the end of 2020, it seemed the legislature, the courts, and even California voters wanted to move away from the independent contractor test codified in Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5). However, during 2021, the pendulum seems to...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

7-Eleven Prevails in Employee Misclassification Suit

Foley & Lardner LLP on

A federal court for the Central District of California in Haitayan v. 7-Eleven, Inc. has ruled in favor of franchisor 7-Eleven and against four franchise owners who claimed they were employees under California law rather than...more

Snell & Wilmer

Not So Fast: California Judge Strikes Down Proposition 22, Finding That Rideshare and Delivery Drivers Are Employees—Not...

Snell & Wilmer on

The road to independent contractor status for rideshare and food delivery drivers working for companies like Uber, Lyft, and Grubhub in California has been neither smooth nor inexpensive. After spending more than $200 million...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

AB 5 Contractor-Classification Battles Set to Heat Up in 2021

Employers grappling with independent-contractor classification had a busy 2020—and should expect a flurry of additional activity this year. Few areas in employment law are changing as rapidly. Last year, many concerned about...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Worker Classification: A Pre- And Post-COVID-19 Challenge For Real Estate Industry

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

While some say “COVID-19 has changed everything,” a couple of issues for real estate employers are unchanged. First, in the brokerage world, properly classifying agents as independent contractors, instead of employees,...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

California Supreme Court Clarifies Dynamex’s “ABC” Test, Concluding that Independent Contractor Status Applies Retroactively

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Q: Does the “ABC test” for independent contractor status in the state of California apply retroactively? ...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

Proposition 22 Challenged in Oakland State Court

CDF Labor Law LLP on

Last November, California voters convincingly (almost 60% supporting) enacted Proposition 22.  This Proposition was a well-funded effort that allows gig drivers working for companies like Uber, Lyft and Doordash to avoid the...more

Fisher Phillips

Once-Pivotal Grubhub Case Back On The Court Docket – But Has The Gig Economy Moved On?

Fisher Phillips on

A federal appeals court just resurrected a pivotal gig economy battle that at one time seemed to be the center of the legal universe – but for a variety of reasons seems much less important these days. The 9th Circuit Court...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: California’s Dynamex/ABC Test is Retroactive

Lewitt Hackman on

In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the ABC Test announced in a California Supreme Court decision, Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018) could apply to franchise...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

California Supreme Court Rules Dynamex Decision Applies Retroactively | Newsletters | Legal News: Distribution & Franchise

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The California Supreme Court has followed up on its groundbreaking decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018), which imposed the so-called “ABC Test” for determining whether a worker is...more

K&L Gates LLP

The Past Looks like the Present: The California Supreme Court Determines that the Dynamex Decision on Independent Contractor...

K&L Gates LLP on

On 14 January 2020, the California Supreme Court held that its earlier landmark decision setting forth the definitive rule for independent contractor classification, Dynamex Ops. W. Inc. v. Superior Court, 416 P.3d 1 (2018),...more

Snell & Wilmer

California Supreme Court Rules That Dynamex ABC Test Applies Retroactively

Snell & Wilmer on

On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court ruled in Vazquez et al. v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Case no. S258191, that the Dynamex ABC Test, which makes it harder for companies to classify workers as...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Supreme Court Rules Dynamex ABC Test is Retroactive

Fenwick & West LLP on

The California Supreme Court held on January 14, 2021, that its landmark Dynamex decision, which established a rigid standard under California law for companies to classify workers as independent contractors, and later was...more

Perkins Coie

California’s Supreme Court Confirms the Retroactivity of the ABC Test Established in the 2018 Dynamex Decision

Perkins Coie on

On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court decided Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc. The decision holds that the ABC test used to determine independent contractor versus employee status for purposes of...more

203 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 9

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide