Labor/Employment,
California Supreme Court
Jul. 15, 2014
Who's an 'employee' under the Labor Code still uncertain
The recent decision in Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers Inc. aside, plaintiffs in independent contractor misclassification cases will continue to assert that the wage order's definition controls.
In Martinez v. Combs, 49 Cal. 4th 35 (2010), the state Supreme Court addressed the issue of who is an employer for claims made under the California Labor Code and wage orders. Specifically, the court held that where a plaintiff asserts a claim under a Labor Code section and a complementary wage order, the wage order's definition is controlling. The impact of Martinez is significant as the wage order's definition of "employer" is broader than the traditional common law test ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In