California Supreme Court’s Dynamex decision still has millions wondering
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: John Kabateck, California State Director, 916-956-9027, [email protected],
or Shawn Lewis, Legislative Director, 916-342-9315; [email protected],
or Luke Wake, Staff Attorney, NFIB Legal Center, 916-384-7648, [email protected]
SACRAMENTO, April 18, 2019—April 30 will mark the one-year anniversary of the California Supreme Court’s Dynamex decision, which sought to clarify once and for all when a hire is an employee or an independent contractor.
But far from settling the matter, it has put the livelihoods of two million Californians at risk. Assembly Bill 5 provides only a modest amount of clarity to those wanting to operate legally; Senate Bill 238 would be much better for all, argues NFIB, the state and nation’s leading small-business association.
ATTENTION NEWS EDITORS, TV, AND RADIO HOSTS—Three officials from NFIB are available to provide background and quotes for any related stories you might be or working on about Dynamex, or they can go live on air to talk to your listeners and viewers. They are:
- John Kabateck, NFIB California State Director, 916-956-9027, [email protected]
- Shawn Lewis, NFIB Legislative Director, 916-342-9315; [email protected],
- Luke Wake, Staff Attorney, NFIB Legal Center, 916-384-7648, [email protected]
For more information about the Dynamex decision, the following resources can be read:
- Capitol Weekly, April 18—Dynamex One Year Later. More Confusion Than Clarification
- NFIB Legal Center, April 9—Major Questions Remain in the Wake of the Supreme Court’s 2018 Dynamex Decision
- Dynamex One-Pager
Key Takeaway:
“While much of the Dynamex commentary has focused on the impact for the so called ’gig economy,’ the reality is that Dynamex affects businesses of all shapes and sizes across industry lines … One issue, in particular, is going to require clarification—either from the Legislature or the courts. Dynamex says that a worker cannot be deemed an independent contractor if they are performing work of the sort performed by employees within the ’usual course of business.’ But the opinion gave precious little guidance as to what constitutes the ’usual course of business.’ Does this preclude a photographer from working with a makeup artist in a photoshoot? Does it preclude a magazine from treating a freelance photographer as a contractor? And is there liability for a retail shop renting out space to a florist?” – From NFIB Legal Center, Major Questions Remain in the Wake of Supreme Court’s 2018 Dynamex Decision
###
For more than 75 years, NFIB has been advocating on behalf of America’s small and independent business owners, both in Washington, D.C., and in all 50 state capitals. NFIB is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, and member-driven. Since our founding in 1943, NFIB has been exclusively dedicated to small and independent businesses and remains so today. For more information, please visit nfib.com.
NFIB
921 11th St. Ste. 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
916-448-9904
www.nfib.com/CA
Twitter: @NFIB_CA
Facebook: @NFIB.CA
