Bradley v. Networkers Int'l, LLC, 2012 WL 6182473 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)
The
three named plaintiffs in this case were among approximately 140
skilled workers retained by Networkers to provide repair and
installation services at cell sites. Each worker was required to sign a
standard contract, which stated that he or she was an independent contractor rather than an employee. The purported independent contractor
agreement was later replaced with an employment agreement under which
only one of the named plaintiffs had worked. The trial court denied
class certification, but the Court of Appeal reversed the order except
with respect to plaintiffs' claims for alleged off-the-clock violations
as to which the court held class certification was properly denied. As
for the meal and rest break and unpaid overtime claims, the Court
distinguished Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, 53
Cal. 4th 1004 (2012) and held that under this employer's "uniform
practice, none of the workers was provided, or given authorization to
take, the required meal or rest breaks" because they had been treated as
"independent contractors." Thus, class certification was improperly
denied as to those claims. Cf. Barnes, Crosby, Fitzgerald & Zeman v. Ringler,
2012 WL 6633855 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (attorney may be equitably
estopped from claiming a fee-sharing agreement is unenforceable where
the attorney is responsible for non-compliance with the rules requiring
informed written consent from the client).
For More Information Contact us at:
http://beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment