• print
  • decrease text sizeincrease text size
    text

California Senate passes landmark bill cracking down on gig economy abuses

Share this post

This is huge. The California state Senate passed Assembly Bill 5, which will rein in gig economy abuses, in a 29 to 11 vote. App-based companies like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash tried to negotiate an exemption for themselves, but legislators held firm and the bill—which needs to be re-passed by the state Assembly and then signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom—includes those key players in the gig economy.

AB5 puts into law a 2018 California Supreme Court decision imposing stricter tests on whether a worker can be counted as an independent contractor. Under that decision and under AB5, companies can’t call workers independent contractors if the work they do is central to the company’s mission or if the company substantially directs their work. That applies not just Uber drivers and food delivery workers but to port truck drivers, janitors, manicurists, strippers, and some tech workers.

Once it becomes law, AB5 is expected to affect more than a million California workers, and could set a model for other states. AB5 “finally asserts one set of standards for determining employee status for all workers, putting an end to the chaos of poverty and despair gig bosses created in their pursuit of profits at any cost,” said New York Taxi Workers Alliance Executive Director Bhairavi Desai. “Now all workers—from nail salon workers, to delivery workers, to app drivers—will have employee protections if their work is part of the core services of the company that employs them.” She went on to call for “the same clarity for employee status here in New York State.”

”Today the so-called gig companies present themselves as the innovative future of tomorrow, a future where companies don’t pay Social Security or Medicare,” said state Sen. Maria Elena Durazo, a longtime labor leader turned elected official. “Let’s be clear: there is nothing innovative about underpaying someone for their labor.”

”Misclassification is an attempt to weaken the power of workers, including the thousands of truck drivers in California who deserve a living wage and full rights as employees. With this vote, the California Senate has taken a strong stand with workers who should earn a living wage and have the protections to which they are entitled,” Teamsters president Jim Hoffa said in a statement.

The California Assembly and Newsom are expected to put AB5 into law without drama. But Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash are vowing to add drama by pouring nearly $100 million into a ballot initiative trying to get themselves exempted from the law.

This article was originally published at Daily Kos on September 11, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is a Daily Kos contributor editor since December 2006. Full-time staff since 2011, currently assistant managing editor.. Laura at Daily Kos

Share this post

Google’s Chance To Do Good For Gig Workers

Share this post

Google is famous for workplaces called “campuses” where employees get enormous paychecks and enjoy all the perks of fancy private college campuses, including pingpong tables and other entertainment. ­

But other workers who produce for Google across the country are not so pampered. They are Google’s underclass. In this two-tier system, these workers get less money, less respect, and fewer perks.

It’s no wonder that these workers, like those at HCL, a contracting company that helps staff Google’s offices, have turned to labor unions to help fight for better conditions. Employees of HCL in Pittsburgh filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board late last month requesting a vote on representation by the Pittsburgh Association of Technical Professionals, a project of the United Steelworkers (USW) union, the union I lead.

And a union will help these workers. But Google also has a golden opportunity to change this system, to go to bat for contract workers. It wields clout over its contractors and should encourage them to do right by their employees, like those at HCL.

Because sure, pingpong tables are nice, but what these workers want is what all workers deserve: fair pay, decent benefits, a voice in their workplace and the job security that comes from a bargained labor contract.

Google should encourage HCL to recognize the union and give its employees a fair contract. By doing this, Google would set a significant example for the tech industry.

Contract and gig workers, like those at HCL, are a big part of the U.S. economy — a 2018 report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that 15.5 million Americans worked as independent contractors, on-call employees, freelancers or temporary employees. That’s up from 12.1 million in 1995.

Besides lower pay, contract workers often get fewer benefits than a company’s regular employees. Or they get no benefits­.

Now, they’re turning to labor unions — like so many workers in other fields have done — to improve their lot.

The Trump administration should be sticking up for them also. But it isn’t. It’s almost as if the National Labor Relations Board is stuck in the 1950s, unable to catch up with a new economy in which workers need protection even though their working arrangements have changed.

Just look at the board’s ruling on the drivers for SuperShuttle, the airport transportation company. The board ruled in January that the drivers are contractors, not employees, so they’re unable to organize.

NLRB officials have adopted a similar position with other gig workers, including Uber drivers.

The board dealt gig workers another big blow late last month. It ruled that Velox Express Inc., a medical courier service in Arkansas and Tennessee, didn’t violate the National Labor Relations Act by misclassifying employees as contractors.

A decision like that will embolden other employers to pass employees off as contractors. If employees challenge a misclassification and win, the company faces no penalty. That’s no deterrent for abusing workers.

The NLRB must get with the times, just as labor unions have. In addition to its core industries, the USW now represents pharmacists, physicians, nurses, college professors, lawyers and workers in many other fields. And labor unions of all sorts are stepping up to help gig workers, many of whom are millennials who understand the benefits of union representation.

Lots of money is at stake in worker classification battles. But there’s something more — the compact between worker and employer — that’s also on the line.

Employees make a company what it is. Their dedication turns a profit and keeps customers happy. Their innovation enables a company to get ahead. In return, a company has an obligation to provide its workers — all of its workers — with decent wages and benefits.

Uber and Lyft don’t get it yet. They’re prime examples of gig economy employers getting rich on the backs of “independent” contractors, some of whom don’t make minimum wage after costs for gas, insurance and car repairs are considered.

In California, lawmakers are considering a bill that could make it more difficult for companies to classify gig workers as contractors. Uber, Lyft and DoorDash have vowed to spend up to $90 million on a ballot initiative that would help them to classify workers on their terms.

That’s a lot of money to spend to hold working people down.

Across the country, Google has a veritable army of contract workers. In fact, it has more contract workers than employees. HCL is one of many companies that provide Google with “TVCs,” shorthand for “temps, vendors and contractors.”

Bloomberg and other news outlets have reported on this “shadow work force.” The contract workers’ badges, red instead of a Google employee’s white, are only one sign of their second-class status. Contract workers often are paid significantly less than direct workers and are denied some of the perks that Google employees get.

In April, Google announced that it would require contract workers to be given health care, sick leave and parental leave by 2022 and a $15-an-hour minimum wage by 2020. But contractors can do better.

Nationwide, Google’s contract workers perform a variety of functions ranging from code-writing to human resources work to team management. When companies pay these workers less than their own employees or save money on benefits, they shore up their already-robust bottom line, keep investors happy and provide more money for stock buybacks that enrich CEOs.

If the federal government won’t protect workers, states should step in when they can, as California is doing.

To be considered contractors under California’s bill, workers would have to be free of a company’s “control and direction,” perform duties outside the company’s regular scope of work and have other employment.

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, a Democrat from San Diego who introduced the legislation, said the NLRB’s position on Uber drivers “is just one more instance in President Trump’s growing list of attacks against workers.”

State lawmakers and organized labor are important allies for contract and gig workers. But Google can make a big difference also. Google has a chance to step up, demand fairness for contract workers and become a role model for the entire tech industry, an industry that prides itself on innovation.

This blog was originally published by the Our Future on September 9, 2019. Reprinted with permission. 

About the Author: Tom Conway is international president of the United Steelworkers (USW).


Share this post

California moves one step closer to reining in the gig economy and expanding worker protections

Share this post

A million California workers are denied key workplace protections—including the minimum wage—because their employers falsely label them as independent contractors. But that came one step closer to changing on Friday when the state Senate’s appropriations committee passed Assembly Bill 5, a plan to crack down on that misclassification of workers.

AB5 is based on a 2018 decision by the California Supreme Court that imposed a stricter test for whether a worker could be considered an independent contractor. Companies can’t call workers independent contractors if the work they do is central to the company’s mission or if the company substantially directs their work, the court ruled. The legislation will make enforcement significantly easier, but it also includes a lot of exemptions for professions such as doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, accountants, insurance agents, hairstylists, and more.

The trucking industry and app-based companies like Uber and Lyft have been screaming for exemptions but so far, their efforts are in vain. “Trucking has some of the worst violators,” said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, the bill’s author. “We are not going to strip out employee protections.” Uber, Lyft, and others are threatening to pour $90 million into a campaign for a ballot measure exempting them, which could become a massive fight in 2020.

Other workers who will be covered by AB5 include janitors, construction workers, manicurists, strippers, and some in the tech industry. Being an employee means protections including the minimum wage, overtime, workers comp, sick leave, family leave, and more, in addition to employer payments for Social Security and Medicare. Companies also don’t pay payroll taxes on independent contractors, shorting the state of California by an estimated $7 billion a year on misclassified workers.

The bill, which passed the state Assembly, heads to the full Senate for a vote that’s expected to succeed. According to a spokesman for Gov. Gavin Newsom, “The governor is supportive of addressing the misclassification of workers, which for decades has been a driver of income inequality.”

This blog was originally published at Daily Kos on September 3, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is labor editor at Daily Kos.

Share this post

Stephanie Land’s ‘Maid’ shows the limits of hard work in struggle to survive the U.S. economy

Share this post

How could Stephanie Land’s book Maid not make a splash, with the opening sentence, “My daughter learned to walk in a homeless shelter,” and a follow-through that lives up to the impact of that sentence? A splash it has made, debuting at number three on The New York Times bestseller list over the winter, and now being turned into a TV show and making former President Barack Obama’s summer reading list. Land’s book tells the story of years spent scraping by as a single mother to her daughter Mia, patching together government aid and work cleaning houses while coping with inadequate housing, inadequate child care, an abusive ex, and the constant stress and pain involved in all those things. But it’s also a challenge to its readers, pushing us to reckon with the comprehensive stresses of poverty, the importance of government assistance, and—for those who can afford to have someone else clean their homes—how to do the ethical thing (more on that coming soon, at least for people living inWashington, D.C., Baltimore, and Boston).

Maid is a beautiful book and a sad book and even, at times, a joyful book—a story of a mother’s love for her daughter—but most of all it’s an important book about the U.S. economy and what it does to people. Maid is filled with keen observations of the houses Land cleaned—she first broke through as a writer with a Vox piece about what she saw in those homes—and devastating details about what it takes, as a low-paid service worker, to make comparatively wealthy customers happy: ignoring the copious amounts of porn in one house, or the pills in another, dealing with the dog poop on a beige carpet. Getting every last hair out of a tub coated in the owner’s bath oils.

Land also weaves into that narrative the insecurity, indignity, and fear involved in poverty—the doctors who suggest she’s a bad mother because poverty is making her daughter sick; the moments when a client does treat her as a human being, a peer, moments that shine through because they’re so unusual; the vulnerability to heat and cold and mold in a shoddy apartment; the need to keep an old car running; the physical pain and hunger. “I walked along a deep precipice of hopelessness,” she writes. “Each morning brought a constant, lip-chewing stress over making it to work and getting home without my car breaking down. My back ached constantly. I dampened my hunger pangs with coffee. It felt impossible to climb out of this hole.”

Part of the reason this works so powerfully within the framework of the stories the United States tells about itself, of course, is because Land is so middle-class in her tastes and aspirations—because the next sentence in the above passage is, “My only real hope was school: an education would be my token to freedom.” Because she wants her daughter to eat fresh berries and drink organic milk, because she see books in a man’s apartment as an attraction, because she is someone who can write her way out of poverty. She is tailor-made to appeal even to people who don’t support a strong safety net or who don’t see low-wage workers as worthy of respect. But Maid is an important book about U.S. politics precisely because Land is constantly aware of how exactly that works in her life—how the people around her don’t see her as someone who is, who could be, desperately poor. How her friends and employers don’t imagine her to be on government aid as they sneer at and insult people on government aid, people that she keenly points out are always seen as other in a way she is not.

Land is crystal clear that she survived with the help of government assistance: Chapter 5 of the book, in fact, is titled, “Seven different kinds of government assistance.” She shows powerfully how difficult that assistance is to access and how inadequate to her needs it is. And she is equally clear about who doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt while she, as a white woman working her way through college, did, writing about a cleaning client—someone from whom she needed employment—railing, “Last time I went to the big store, I got in line behind a Mexican family … They used food stamps to pay for their food. And those kids were dressed to the nines!”

In that moment, Land writes, she kept cleaning the woman’s house, biting her tongue and thinking “of how much Mia loved her fancy dresses and shiny shoes, which I purchased with credit from the consignment store. Maybe Donna didn’t realize I was on food stamps, too.” She goes on:

I wanted to tell Donna that it wasn’t her business what that family bought or ate or wore and that I hated when cashiers at the supermarket said “On your EBT?” loud enough for people in line behind me to hear. I wanted to tell her that undocumented people couldn’t receive food benefits or tax refunds, even though they paid taxes. They couldn’t receive any benefits at all. Those were available only for people who were born here or who had obtained the documents to stay. So those children, whose parents had risked so much to give them a good life, were citizens who deserved every bit as much government help as my daughter did. I knew this because I’d sat beside them in countless government offices. I overheard their conversations with caseworkers sitting behind glass, failing to communicate through a language barrier. But these attitudes that immigrants came here to steal our resources were spreading, and the stigmas resembled those facing anyone who relied on government assistance to survive.

That’s a passage that speaks especially loudly in the era of Donald Trump, of course, while reminding readers that Trump didn’t create this kind of bigotry.

In some of Maid’s most poignant moments, Land permits herself to dream, briefly, of luxuries not available to her. There are the tickets to a Mariners game, offered to her by a client, that are “a dream I’d had since I’d been Mia’s age,” but that she can’t use herself because she can’t afford the gas money. Or the time she “noticed the hot tub with an empty bottle of champagne sitting in the corner” at a home she’s cleaning and “My body ached, yearned for even a chance, just one opportunity, to drink champagne in a hot tub.” I dearly hope that the book’s success has let her live out those, and other, daydreams. But you shouldn’t have to write a bestseller to get a single afternoon or evening of fun and relaxation, and it would be difficult for me, at least, to enjoy a kitchen that’s clean because someone else was doing painful labor and still living in poverty.

This blog was originally published at Daily Kos on September 2, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is labor editor at Daily Kos.

Share this post

Union Veterans Fight for Texas Catering Workers

Share this post

On Tuesday morning, as union veteran Sam Tijerina drove from Pasadena, Texas, to Dallas, he had a lot on his mind. His thoughts wandered as he passed mile markers and towns—he thought about his young family at home and the life that having a union job has provided them. “A union card has allowed me to live with dignity,” he said.

Tijerina was traveling to one of the largest acts of civil disobedience that the Texas labor movement has waged in years. LSG Sky Chef workers, who are contracted by American Airlines, planned a rally with UNITE HERE to advocate for raising wages. “It was important to be part of the civil disobedience because my fellow veterans are affected by poor wages,” Tijerina said. “There are an estimated 1.3 million veteran workers who earn less than $15 an hour. It is disheartening to know my brothers and sisters have to work multiple jobs to make ends meet. One job should be enough.”

More than 600 supporters showed up at the protest, including catering workers, union members from other airports and local supporters like Tijerina. He was one of 58 people who were arrested while blocking traffic during the protest.

Tijerina is an Elevator Constructor (IUEC) from Local 31 and a Marine veteran who served in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom II. The Marines taught him about selfless service and how to lead by example. “I know that it’s not just about me,” Tijerina said. “It’s about fighting for everyone, no matter what their situation is.” This is the same sentiment echoed by Union Veterans Council Executive Director Will Attig at a recent speech to the Texas AFL-CIO convention, shortly before announcing the creation of a Texas chapter of the Union Veterans Council. “Leaders lead from the front and motivate others to take action,” Attig added. “Texas union vets are ready to take action to support the working people of this state.”

Earlier this year, Attig was among a group of union leaders and activists who were arrested at the U.S. Capitol during the government shutdown, when a quarter of 1 million veteran workers faced no pay and job instability. Attig hopes this action will motivate fellow union veterans to get more involved. Attig wants Union Veterans Council members and the labor movement to know that union veterans are a force to be reckoned with.

The Union Veterans Council is working to unify our veterans by giving them the tools and platform to make their voices heard on a local and national level, along with inspiring union veterans to take an action-based role in the labor movement. Tijerina is just one of a growing movement of union veterans across the country who are using their voices to fight and advocate for fellow workers and the issues that matter to their community.

This article was originally published at AFL-CIO on August 22, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: The Union Veterans Council brings working-class veterans together to speak out on the issues that impact us most, especially the need for good jobs and a strong, fully funded and staffed VA.

Share this post

These Hotel Workers Say They Shouldn’t Have to Work Multiple Jobs to Make Ends Meet

Share this post

Hotel workers union UNITE HERE isn’t resting on its laurels after winning a contract fight with the giant Marriott chain late last year. The union is pursuing new organizing efforts, including a push in Baltimore for a first contract covering some 145 newly unionized members there, according to Vikas Mohite, a full-time Marriott employee and active rank-and-file union member.
 This article was originally published at In These Times on August 8, 2019.  Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Bruce Vail is a Baltimore-based freelance writer with decades of experience covering labor and business stories for newspapers, magazines and new media. He was a reporter for Bloomberg BNA’s Daily Labor Report, covering collective bargaining issues in a wide range of industries, and a maritime industry reporter and editor for the Journal of Commerce, serving both in the newspaper’s New York City headquarters and in the Washington, D.C. bureau.

Share this post

California Assembly votes to rein in gig economy abuses, this week in the war on workers

Share this post

The so-called gig economy often rests on exploiting workers by misclassifying them as independent contractors, which means they don’t get minimum wage, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, overtime pay, or other protections that regular employees are guaranteed (at least in theory). That may be about to change in California, where the state Supreme Court ruled to clarify how workers are classified last year, and the Assembly passed a bill this week tackling the issue.

If the bill becomes law, employers could only classify workers as independent contractors if they could prove that the workers truly controlled their own schedules and working conditions, weren’t doing work central to the company’s business model, and had their own “independently established” business or role. That would have huge ramifications for huge companies like Uber, Lyft, and Amazon, but would also apply to workers at many small businesses. The bill does exclude many jobs, though, such as doctors, real estate agents, lawyers, and some hairdressers.

AB 5 passed 53 to 11 in the Assembly and now heads to the state Senate. “Big businesses shouldn’t be able to pass their costs onto taxpayers while depriving workers of the labor law protections they are rightfully entitled to,” tweeted Assembly member Lorena Gonzalez, one of the bill’s authors, in celebration of its passage.

This blog was originally published at Daily Kos on June 1, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is labor editor at Daily Kos.

Share this post

Federal court deals a blow to Uber, Lyft drivers trying to unionize in Seattle

Share this post

A two-year legal battle over a Seattle, Washington law allowing Uber and Lyft drivers to unionize was prolonged again this week, after a federal appeals court ruled Friday that it can be challenged under federal antitrust law.

The first-in-the-nation law was unanimously passed by the Seattle City Council in 2015 and sought to give ride-share drivers the opportunity to unionize and bargain for better pay and benefits.

But it was swiftly challenged by business and conservative groups, namely the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, representing Uber and Lyft, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, and the Freedom Foundation. In a 2016 lawsuit against the city of Seattle, the Chamber of Commerce claimed “the ordinance will burden innovation, increase prices, and reduce quality and services for consumers.”

One legal challenge was dismissed last year, but the law remained on hold until other legal challenges were resolved. On Friday, three judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously agreed that Seattle’s law is not exempt from the Sherman Antitrust Act, sending it back to U.S. District Court.

Uber spokesman Caleb Weaver called the decision “a win for rideshare drivers, riders and the entire Seattle community.”

The Teamsters Local 117 and members of the App-Based Drivers Association (ABDA) expressed their frustration and disappointment in the wake of Friday’s ruling.

“Anti-trust laws were put in place to protect the little guy from monopolistic practices from large corporations, not to shield a company like Uber — valued at over $70 billion — from negotiating with its workers over fair pay and working conditions,” said Don Creery, Uber and Lyft driver and member of the ABDA leadership council.

One bright spot for proponents of Seattle’s law: the Ninth Circuit judges agreed in their ruling that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) can cover independent contractors, like Uber and Lyft drivers.

This week, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), along with other Senate Democrats, introduced legislation that would make it easier for people working in the gig economy to prove they are employees and thus be able to organize and collectively bargain. While the legislation doesn’t stand a chance in the current Republican-controlled Congress, Bloomberg notes that it has the backing of potential Democratic presidential candidates and could be a sign of things to come if Democrats are able to regain control of either chamber this fall.

This article was originally published at ThinkProgress on May 13, 2018. Reprinted with permission. 

About the Author: Kiley Kroh is a senior editor at ThinkProgress.


Share this post

What to do when your work problem isn’t a legal issue

Share this post

A boss starts cancelling your check-ins after you give them feedback. A co-worker routinely undermines and interrupts you during meetings. You’ve been passed over for a promotion twice. Even after speaking to a lawyer, you’re not sure what to do.

Every day, across every workplace in America, people face challenges that don’t necessarily fall into a legal category. Instead, they fall into a vast gray area where solutions are rarely black and white. These issues–while not legal in nature–affect how we show up at work, and can have a lasting impact on a career. In a recent study, over 95 percent of people surveyed faced at least one challenging situation at work. Half left their job as a result.

Meanwhile, resources to help people navigate these challenges haven’t evolved to meet the needs of our vibrant, dynamic, and diverse workforce. Employee-provided resources are largely distrusted. Nearly 80 percent of people surveyed had never used a service provided by their employer. Moreover, the rapid growth of the gig economy often leaves employees feeling even more isolated. When people don’t get the support they need they’re more likely to take a step back in their career or leave their job without having another lined up.

Empower Work is a new resource that fills this gap by putting employees first. We provide free, anonymous, and immediate support for people facing non-legal work issues. Anyone can text 510-674-1414 and connect to a vetted and trained peer counselor within minutes.

Our approach is rooted in inquiry and empathy. We provide the space to talk about your experience and work toward an outcome that feels right to you. Our goal is for people to leave the conversation feeling empowered with the tools and support they need to move forward. Over 90 percent of people say they feel better after talking to an Empower Work peer counselor.

“Thank you for being [there] for me in the midst of a truly horrible, awful, depressing work situation. You helped me figure out my next steps.” -Empower Work Texter

Our peer counselors are working professionals who volunteer their time to support people through their most difficult experiences at work. They are leaders, coaches, mentors at every stage of their careers. Peer counselors undergo a selection process and receive hands-on training that blends best practices in coaching, counseling, and business.

We believe everyone should have access to support for tough work issues. What’s tough varies from person to person. You might be grappling with the decision to take a pay cut to pursue a dream job; questioning whether your company’s values are aligned with your own; or need support preparing for a big performance review. Next time you’re facing a difficult situation or decision at work remember you’re not alone.

Having a non-legal work issue you’d like to chat about? Text: 510-674-1414. Peer counselors are available Monday-Friday, 8:30am-8:00pm PT. To learn more visit www.empowerwork.org.

About the Author: Lauren Brisbo is a social impact communications professional with over a decade of experience. She’s worked with a range of nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies to launch communications initiatives that win hearts and minds, give a voice to those less heard, and help people make well-informed decisions. She’s passionate about helping organizations promote good causes externally, and creating supportive internal work environments that help employees thrive. Lauren currently leads communications and outreach for Empower Work, a free, accessible, and immediate text hotline for anyone facing a tough issue at work.


Share this post

California court decision poses a major threat to Uber and Lyft: minimum wage laws

Share this post

The business model at Uber and other “gig economy” companies could take a big hit in California, thanks to a new state Supreme Court ruling—the companies might be forced to follow labor laws like paying the minimum wage. Currently, many companies classify their workers as independent contractors who aren’t eligible for a raft of legal protections, protections that cost employers money. But the California Supreme Court ruled that delivery drivers for Dynamex Operations West are eligible for minimum wage and overtime protections:

The ruling applies to disputes under state Industrial Welfare Commission orders that set standards for minimum wages and overtime payments required for all workers who are classified as employees, but not for independent contractors. Companies like Dynamex, as well as Uber and Lyft, have classified their drivers as contractors and argued that they have enough control over their working lives — setting their own hours, with the freedom to drive for other companies — to be called independent.

But the court said the company, to justify contractor status, must prove, first, that the worker is free, in everyday tasks, from the company’s “control and direction”; second, that the work is “outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business”; and third, that the worker is regularly engaged in an independent occupation or business of the same type he or she is performing for the company.

For example, [Chief Justice Tani] Cantil-Sakauye said, a store that hires an outside plumber to fix a leak, or an electrician to install a new line, could consider them contractors. But a clothing manufacturer that hires seamstresses who work at home to make dresses that the company will sell has hired them to perform work in its usual line of business and must pay them as employees.

The ruling did not address other issues, such as payment of work expenses, workers’ compensation and unemployment benefits, which are covered by separate laws. But Kevin Ruf, a lawyer for about 300 Dynamex drivers who will now be allowed to pursue their case as a class action, said the court’s rationale should help workers seeking employee status overall.

This isn’t over—companies will fight this out case by case, spending huge amounts of money on lawyers to avoid having to pay their workers minimum wage and overtime (and other benefits and protections that might follow). But it’s a step in the right direction.

This blog was originally published at DailyKos on May 1, 2018. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is labor editor at DailyKos.


Share this post

Subscribe For Updates

Subscribe via RSS Subscribe via RSS

Or, sign up to receive our email newsletter:

* indicates required

Recent Posts

Forbes Best of the Web, Summer 2004
A Forbes "Best of the Web" Blog

Archives

  • Tracking image for JustAnswer widget
  • Find an Employment Lawyer

  • Support Workplace Fairness

 
 

Find an Employment Attorney

The Workplace Fairness Attorney Directory features lawyers from across the United States who primarily represent workers in employment cases. Please note that Workplace Fairness does not operate a lawyer referral service and does not provide legal advice, and that Workplace Fairness is not responsible for any advice that you receive from anyone, attorney or non-attorney, you may contact from this site.