Skip to main content

Divided Ninth Circuit Overturns AB 5 Injunction For Transportation Industry

 

About a year ago, the California Trucking Association filed suit and sought to obtain an injunction to prevent California’s AB 5 from applying to motor carriers.  The California Trucking Association argued that AB 5, which codified the ABC Test to determine whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor, was preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (“Act”) and therefore did not apply to motor carriers.  An injunction was granted and a subsequent appeal was filed that ended up in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

At the end of April, a split decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s injunction on the grounds that the district court abused its discretion.  According to the majority opinion, because AB 5 is a law of general applicability that impacts an employer’s interaction with its workforce (rather than with consumers), the Act did not preempt AB 5.  To be preempted by the Act, the Ninth Circuit wrote that AB 5 would need to be sufficiently “related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier...with respect to the transportation of property.”  In this instance, it was found that because AB 5 only affects the classification of workers (ie whether they are employees or independent contractors), it does not result in a motor carrier “freezing into place a particular price, route, or service that a carrier would otherwise not provide.”  Consequently, the injunction issued by the district court was undone.

The question now arises as to what happens next.  For starters, it is possible the Ninth Circuit would take up the matter en banc as only three Judges ruled on the injunction last month.  Should the entire Ninth Circuit uphold April’s ruling, I would expect the California Trucking Association to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court given that the First Circuit has issued an opposite ruling from the Ninth Circuit.  (For those unaware, a split in circuits on a matter of law is often one of the reasons the Supreme Court will take an appeal.  Of course, the Supreme Court does not have to do so which would leave a split in circuits on the matter.)

For the time being, this is a favorable ruling for those looking to extend the reach of AB 5.  However, this is not the last time we are likely to hear of this appeal.  Stay tuned.


For a copy of the Ninth Circuit’s decision:  https://btlaw.com/-/media/files/blog/cta-9th.ashx

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, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more