/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/V6QMAFU3RNOKDBSEFAMW3G2U5Q.jpg)
The U.S. Supreme Court docket constructing is seen in Washington, U.S., June 26, 2022. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Register now for FREE limitless entry to Reuters.com
(Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court docket on Monday turned away a problem by teams representing freelance staff to California’s controversial legislation making it tougher for companies to deal with staff as impartial contractors fairly than staff.
The court docket denied a petition by the American Society for Journalists and Authors and the Nationwide Press Photographers Affiliation, which claim the 2019 legislation often known as AB5 violates freelance journalists’ free-speech rights by exempting different staff however not them.
The ninth U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals in October said AB5 regulates financial exercise and never speech, and that it made sense for the legislation to carve out sure industries by which employee misclassification has been much less of an issue.
Register now for FREE limitless entry to Reuters.com
The California Lawyer Common’s workplace didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark.
Jim Manley of the Pacific Authorized Basis, who represents the freelancer teams, mentioned in an electronic mail that the court docket’s determination “is a loss for the hundreds of freelancers who’ve constructed thriving careers by way of the liberty and suppleness that impartial contracting gives.”
AB5 says staff are an organization’s staff if they’re beneath its direct management, engaged in its ordinary course of enterprise, or don’t function their very own impartial companies.
The problem is crucial for businesses as a result of staff are entitled to the minimal wage, time beyond regulation and different advantages, making them far more costly than impartial contractors.
Commerce teams and “gig financial system” firms lobbied closely towards AB5, claiming it might deprive many staff of flexibility and the chance to work a number of jobs.
In 2020, California voters accredited a poll referendum exempting app-based transportation companies resembling Uber Applied sciences Inc and Lyft Inc from the scope of AB5. A state choose final yr struck down the measure, saying it violated the state’s staff’ compensation legislation. An trade group’s attraction is pending.
The ASJA in its 2019 lawsuit claimed AB5 unreasonably blocks many freelance writers from being handled as impartial contractors primarily based on the content material of their speech, whereas exempting related work carried out for advertising and marketing or creative functions.
A federal choose in 2020 sided with the state, saying the classes of staff outlined within the legislation plainly don’t activate the substance of a employee’s speech, and the ninth Circuit final yr agreed.
The Supreme Court docket has but to behave on a petition by the California Trucking Affiliation in a lawsuit difficult AB5’s utility to the trucking trade. The justices in October declined to take up a separate case involving the classification of truck drivers.
The case is American Society of Journalists and Authors v. Bonta, U.S. Supreme Court docket, No. 21-1172.
For the ASJA: Jim Manley of Pacific Authorized Basis
For California: Deputy Solicitor Common Samuel Siegel of the California Division of Justice
(NOTE: This text has been up to date to incorporate a remark from Jim Manley of the Pacific Authorized Basis.)
Learn extra:
9th Circ. rejects freelancer groups’ challenge to California’s AB5
No SCOTUS review of California law’s impact on trucking industry
Register now for FREE limitless entry to Reuters.com
Our Requirements: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
from Freelancing Jobs – My Blog https://ift.tt/rua6tev
via IFTTT
0 Comments