• Attorneys
  • Practices & Industries
  • Thought Leadership +
    • Videos
    • Podcasts
    • Publications
      • Chemical Law & Prop 65 Blog
    • Webinars
  • News & Events +
    • News
    • Events/
      Speaking Engagements
  • About
  • Careers
  • Diversity
  • Contact
  • Offices
  • Payment Portal +
    • Pay your invoice
    • Pay your retainer
Buchalter
  • About
  • Careers
  • Diversity
  • Contact
  • Offices
  • Attorneys
  • Practices & Industries
  • Thought Leadership +
    • Publications
      • Chemical Law & Prop 65 Blog
    • Webinars
    • Videos
    • Podcasts
  • News & Events +
    • News
    • Events/
      Speaking Engagements
  • Payment Portal +
    • Pay your invoice
    • Pay your retainer
« View All Publications

California Assembly Introduces Bill To Codify Dynamex “ABC” Test

California Franchise Network

December 3, 2018

By: Thomas M. O’Connell

Executive Summary

The California Assembly has introduced a bill to “codify” the “ABC” test recently established in the case of Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 and “clarify its application.”

Analysis

On December 3, 2018, Democratic Assembly Member Gonzalez introduced the outline of a bill that would codify and clarify the California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903. In full, the bill states as follows:

Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex), creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the “ABC” test, to establish that a worker is an independent contractor.

This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to include provisions within this bill would codify the decision in the Dynamex case and clarify its application.

…

SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) On April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903.

(b) In its decision, the Court cited the harm to misclassified workers who lose significant workplace protections, the unfairness to employers who must compete with companies that misclassify, and the loss to the state of needed revenue from companies that use misclassification to avoid obligations such as payment of payroll taxes, payment of premiums for workers compensation, Social Security, unemployment, and disability insurance.

(c) The misclassification of workers as independent contractors has been a significant factor in the erosion of the middle class and the rise in income inequality.

SEC. 2. Section 2750.3 is added to the Labor Code, to read:

2750.3. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section to include provisions that would codify the decision of the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903, and would clarify the decision’s application in state law.

Looking Forward

At present, the bill does little more than state the intentions of the legislature to codify the Dynamex “ABC” test. In Dynamex, the California Supreme Court ruled that the ABC test was the appropriate standard for determining whether a worker was considered an employee or an independent contractor. Going against nearly three decades of precedent, Dynamex found that a worker is considered to be an employee unless the alleged employer can prove: (A) the worker was not under its direction and control in the performance of the work in question; (B) the worker’s business was not in the hiring company’s usual course of business; and (C) the worker was customarily engaged in an independent trade or business.

Unfortunately, the foundation upon which this bill has been put forward–including statements that “[t]he misclassification of workers as independent contractors has been a significant factor in the erosion of the middle class and the rise of income inequality”–indicates that this bill will be a vehicle to attack certain employers.

With the political environment in the State during and since the Fight for 15, this bill and similar actions are simply not a surprise. To the extent your franchise business has not taken the time to do a Dynamex analysis of your employment relationships, now is the time as this issue is not going away anytime soon.

This article was originally published on the California Franchise Network.

 

 

Share

Related Attorneys

  • Thomas M. O'Connell
Buchalter footer logo

Adam Bass, Buchalter President & CEO

  • About
  • Careers
  • News & Events
  • Subscribe
  • Denver
  • Los Angeles
  • Napa Valley
  • Orange County
  • Portland
  • Sacramento
  • Salt Lake City
  • San Diego
  • San Francisco
  • Scottsdale
  • Seattle
  • © Copyright 2023 Buchalter, A Professional Corporation
  • Privacy Notice
  • Notice at Collection
  • Do Not Sell or Share PI
Buchalter Communications

We love sharing our knowledge, but we don't want to inundate you. If you would like to receive communications from Buchalter, please highlight the text boxes below indicating which type of communications you would like to receive, and provide your name and email address. [Street address is only necessary for Points and Authorities.] We appreciate your interest in our work.

"*" indicates required fields

Type*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.