The Law at Work: Clarifying whether a worker is a true independent contractor
It’s been just over a year since the California Supreme Court ruled in Dynamex v. Superior Court that California companies must meet each part of a three-part test to designate workers as independent contractors for purposes of the state’s wage rules. Earlier this month, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals applied the test in a case involving Jan-Pro Franchising, an international janitorial business with a three-tier franchising model. The ultimate issue in the case was whether “unit franchisees” who were the janitors who did the actual cleaning were properly classified as independent contractors instead of Jan-Pro’s employees.
In his The Law at Work column in the San Diego Union-Tribune, Shareholder Dan Eaton outlines three broadly applicable questions the court of appeals directed the trial court to consider – and that all California companies that use independent contractors should consider -- in determining whether the second part of the Dynamex test is met, whether the worker performs work outside the scope of the hiring entity’s business, and whose work therefore would not ordinarily be viewed by others as working in the hiring entity’s business:
- Are the workers necessary to the business?
- Does the hirer continuously use the workers’ services?
- How does the company publicly identify what it is in the business of doing?
View the full article here.