Opinion
S222732
12-21-2016
DYNAMEX OPERATIONS WEST, INC. v. S.C. (LEE)
B249546 Second Appellate District, Div. 7
Supplemental briefing ordered
This matter, in which review has been granted, presents the following issue: In a wage and hour class action involving claims that the plaintiffs are misclassified as independent contractors, may a class be certified based on the Industrial Welfare Commission definitions as construed in Martinez v. Combs (2010) 49 Cal.4th 35 (Martinez), or should the common law test for distinguishing between employees and independent contractors discussed in S.G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Dept. of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341 (Borello), control?
The court requests the parties in the above entitled matter to file supplemental briefs addressing the following question: In resolving the above issue, what relevance, if any, should the court give to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) Enforcement Policies and Interpretations Manual (2002 update as revised March 2006) www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/DLSE_EnfcManual2012.pdf> and, in particular, to the sections of the manual that discuss the independent contractor/employee distinction (§§ 2.2, 2.2.1, 28-28.4.2.4)?
Amici curiae who have filed briefs in this matter may also file supplemental briefs addressing the above question if they so choose. In addition, the court requests the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement to file a brief addressing the above question.
All initial briefs addressing the above question must be served and filed simultaneously on or before January 20, 2017. Any reply to the supplemental briefs must be served and filed on or before February 6, 2017.