Delineating the Distinction Between Employees & Independent Contractors

  • Dedication & Experience

    Representing clients in Southern California since 1925!

    What We Do
  • SoCal Blog: Stay Informed

    Read about developments in the law & how they may affect you.

    Recent News
  • Proven Track Record

    View the recent verdicts & settlements we've won.

    Our Results
  • Take the First Step Now

    Get help now! Use our quick contact form to email us.

    Free Case Review

Delineating the Distinction Between Employees & Independent Contractors

Given the broad protections provided to employees under California labor laws, it comes as no surprise that many employers have attempted to avoid compliance with these protections by classifying workers as "independent contractors" rather than employees. Two recent decisions in the Northern District of California provide some clarification of the law with respect to employees vs. contractors by providing a more concrete delineation between the two, which aims to prevent employee misclassification and payroll fraud. In Cotter v. Lyft, Inc. and O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., both courts denied defendants' motions for summary judgment, which effectively posed that the plaintiffs involved were not employees but independent contractors.

In the analysis, the courts looked to the right-to-control test, which ultimately provides that an employer-employee relationship exists where the employer retains sufficient control regarding the method and manner of job performance. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations, 48 Cal. 3d 341 (1989). In both Cotter and O'Conner, numerous factors were considered in the courts' analysis and denial of defendants' motions for summary judgment, including the companies' requirements that drivers download an app to match their vehicles with nearby customers, submit their vehicles for inspection, submit to a background check; agree to the companies' terms of service, and submit to monitoring requirements.

As the Borello court reasoned, for an employer-employee relationship to exist, the company must retain "all necessary control" over work performance. Id. at 357. However, courts may find that an employer-employee relationship exists absent direct supervision by employer. In Borello, the agricultural employer exercised control over "sharefarmer" employees through incentive programs rather than direct supervision over their work.

Ultimately, courts consider several factors in determining the nature of a work relationship. These factors, as cited in the Borello opinion, include:

"(a) whether or not the one performing services is engaged in a distinct occupation or business; (b) the kind of occupation, with reference to whether, in the locality, the work is usually done under the direction of the principal or by a specialist without supervision; (c) the skill required in the particular occupation; (d) whether the principal or the workman supplies the instrumentalities, tools, and the place of work for the person doing the work; (e) the length of time for which the services are to be performed; (f) the method of payment, whether by the time or by the job; (g) whether or not the work is a part of the regular business of the principal; and (h) whether or not the parties believe they are creating the relationship of employer-employee." Id. at 351.

As illuminated by these factors and the decision in Borello, employers can exercise control over employees in numerous ways. Courts must ultimately consider the totality of the circumstances in making these determinations, which can have major bearing on the respective rights and responsibilities of employees and employers.

Categories: Employment Law
  • Dedication & Experience

    Representing clients in Southern California since 1925!

    What We Do
  • SoCal Blog: Stay Informed

    Read about developments in the law & how they may affect you.

    Recent News
  • Proven Track Record

    View the recent verdicts & settlements we've won.

    Our Results
  • Take the First Step Now

    Get help now! Use our quick contact form to email us.

    Free Case Review
Spray, Gould & Bowers LLP - Orange County Lawyers
Located at 2 Corporate Park, Suite 201
Irvine, CA 92606.
View Map
Phone: (888) 427-8064
Website:
© 2017 All Rights Reserved.

Southern California's Law Firm

Since 1925

Contact our office to recieve a FREE case evaluation.

Call Now 888.427.8064
Internet Marketing Experts The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.