Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


This was one of those weeks where I found several great articles on employee or independent contractor misclassification issues that I wanted to highlight.  Something tells me these disputes have no intention of dying down anytime soon.

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.


Class Action to Proceed Against Uber

Earlier this year, a lawsuit was brought by three Uber drivers against the company and demanded they be reclassified as employees rather than independent contractors.  In early September, a District Judge in San Francisco held that these employees can proceed with a class action against the company.  As a result, this class action will now cover around 160,000 Uber drivers in California.  Should these plaintiffs win, they seek expenses and the full amount of tips received on the job.  It goes without saying that the outcome of this case could have a huge impact on Uber and other similar companies such as Lyft, Grubhub, etc.


Grubhub, DoorDash, and Caviar Face Worker Misclassification Suits

Complaints have been recently filed against Grubhub, DoorDash, and Caviar on the grounds that workers for these companies have been misclassified as independent contractors instead of employees.  As the Los Angeles Times article pointed out, the complaints against Grub Hub and DoorDash are both class actions while the Caviar complaint is only a demand for arbitration at this time.  These complaints have alleged many of the arguments that have already been raised:  workers for these companies were treated as employees but were not provided any of the benefits (ie reimbursement for gas, parking, phone data, etc.).  These cases are still in the early stages of litigation but well worth keeping an eye on.


The Wave of Misclassification Suits Continues

Fortune has a good article on the increasing number of employee/independent contractor misclassification suits that has started to arise.  Kia Kokalitcheva writes that companies such as Uber, Lyft, Doordash, and Grubhub, among others, have been hit with misclassification suits recently.  Since these companies employ a large workforce (and identify them as independent contractors), it should not be too surprising that this is a hot spot for litigation.  While some of these companies are fighting the misclassification claims, the article noted that companies such as Luxe Valet and Shyp recently chose to convert their contract workers to employees rather than litigate the issue.  Time will tell whether this decision to not fight the claims works...but for now, it certainly gets them out of the cross hairs of these suits and away from the public resentment.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more