The California Supreme Court, in Dynamex Operations v. Superior Court, held that for purposes of claims under the California Wage Orders “engage, suffer or permit to work” determines employee status, thus requiring a defendant who disputes that a worker is an employee (rather than an independent contractor) to prove (A) the worker is free from control and direction of the hirer in connection with performing the work, both under contract and in fact; (B) the worker performs work outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and (C) the worker customarily engages in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hirer.

With its decision, the High Court provides further clarification to employers in determining whether a worker may be classified as an independent contractor rather than an employee, which has substantial economic and legal implications for employers across California.

A more detailed analysis can be found on our publications page.

Photo of Hazel U. Poei Hazel U. Poei

Hazel U. Poei is a principal in the Orange County, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Her practice is focused on single-plaintiff, multi-plaintiff, and class action employment litigation in state and federal courts.

Hazel has also handled arbitration proceedings and matters before administrative…

Hazel U. Poei is a principal in the Orange County, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Her practice is focused on single-plaintiff, multi-plaintiff, and class action employment litigation in state and federal courts.

Hazel has also handled arbitration proceedings and matters before administrative agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the California Civil Rights Department, and the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. Hazel has also prepared briefing to the United States Supreme Court.