Existing case law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for those purposes. Existing statutory law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is not an employee under the "ABC" test. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of the "ABC" test described above. Existing law, instead, provides that these exempt relationships are governed by the multifactor test previously adopted in the case of S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341. This bill would also exempt from the "ABC" test specified individuals working as interpreters and translators.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for those purposes. Existing law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. This test is commonly known as the "ABC" test, as described above. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of Dynamex and the provisions described above, including various professional services provided by graphic designers, grant writers, and fine artists, among others. This bill would exempt a person providing services as a livestock judge from the application of Dynamex and the above provisions.
This measure would memorialize the achievements of Rosa Parks in the Civil Rights Movement and would commemorate the 20th Anniversary of Rosa Parks Day in California on February 4, 2020.
This measure would declare August 7, 2020, as Purple Heart Day in California.
Existing case law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for those purposes. Existing statutory law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is not an employee under the ABC test. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of the ABC test described above, including licensed insurance agents, certain health care professionals, including physicians and surgeons, dentists, and podiatrists, subject to meeting certain conditions and license requirements. Existing law, instead, provides that these exempt relationships are governed by the multifactor test previously established in the case of S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341. This bill would expand the above-described exemptions to also include health facilities, as defined, which contract with companies that employ health care providers who provide services to patients at those facilities.
Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for those purposes. Existing law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. This test is commonly known as the "ABC" test, as described above. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of Dynamex and the provisions described above. These exemptions include a temporary exemption for newspaper distributors or newspaper carriers, as defined, until January 1, 2021. This bill would delete the above inoperative date of January 1, 2021, applicable to newspaper distributors or newspaper carriers, thereby making the above exemption apply indefinitely.
Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for those purposes. Existing law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. This test is commonly known as the "ABC" test, as described above. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of Dynamex and the provisions described above. This bill would expand these exemptions to include an individual who holds an active license from the State of California and is practicing as a land surveyor, landscape architect, geologist, or geophysicist and to include an individual who is a construction manager or planner.
Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for those purposes. Existing law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. This test is commonly known as the "ABC" test, as described above. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of Dynamex and the provisions described above, including various professional services provided by graphic designers, grant writers, and fine artists, among others. This bill would also exempt transportation network companies from the application of Dynamex and the above provisions.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various professions and vocations by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law provides for the issuance of reciprocal licenses in certain fields where the applicant, among other requirements, has a license to practice within that field in another jurisdiction, as specified. Existing law requires a board within the department to expedite the licensure process for an applicant who holds a current license in another jurisdiction in the same profession or vocation and who supplies satisfactory evidence of being married to, or in a domestic partnership or other legal union with, an active duty member of the Armed Forces of the United States who is assigned to a duty station in California under official active duty military orders. This bill would prohibit a board from charging an initial or original license fee to an applicant who meets these expedited licensing requirements.