Ex-Grubhub Driver Wins 8-Year Legal Battle in California Court, Gets $65

After nearly a decennary of courtroom argument and appeals , one California human is finally emerging triumphant in a prolonged legal battle against Grubhub .

Raef Lawson , a former Grubhub machine driver andaspiring actor / comedian / writer , has won his case against the company . His ill , first filed in 2015 , is one gravid step closer to being settled . And for all those years of hearings , filing , and briefing Lawson ’s triumph has , so far , netted him an astounding … $65 payout .

More important than the fiscal outcome here , though , is the legal case law the case sets . The opinion could have braggy implications for how “ gig economy ” ship’s company like Grubhub , Uber , Lyft , and DoorDash have to care for their workers in the California .

A Los Angeles-based ex-Grubhub driver has officially won the right to be called an “employee” in the state of California.

A Los Angeles-based ex-Grubhub driver has officially won the right to be called an “employee” in the state of California.Photo:The Image Party(Shutterstock)

Lawson ’s case hinge on whether he was a contractor in his abbreviated four calendar month least sandpiper fork up food for Grubhub , or an employee — entitled to minimal earnings , overtime , and other benefits . An initial 2018 ruling sided with the caller , and denied Lawson employee status . But after an solicitation to the Ninth Circuit and a remand back down to the same district court , Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley has now rule that , under California law , Lawson was lawfully a Grubhub employee during his meter as a delivery number one wood .

“ Mr. Lawson is properly classified as an employee , not an main contractile organ , for intention of his lower limit earnings and overtime title , ” wrote Judge Corley . “ He is entitled to judgment on his minimum earnings claim ( count two of the ill ) with damages in the amount of $ 65.11 , ” the guild adds . That $ 65.11 cause up for sub - minimum wages that Lawson was pay by Grubhub . The complainant was n’t award any extra time , as the tourist court ruled his stipendiary meter worked never exceeded 4o hours in a week . Still , 65 sawhorse is n’t too shabby when it add up with employee status .

employee have many more right wing than main contractor and are legally guaranteed many more welfare from their employers like overtime and access to unemployment policy . Gig workers have been fighting to be recognized as employee for years now , and in places like California they may be beginning to make clearance . Between Judge Corley ’s first and last rulings in Lawson ’s case , the state law change . AB5 , a turning point piece of lawmaking , passed in 2019 — thus settingstricter standardsprotecting workers and bring a newfangled solidification of criteria for what is / isn’t an employee .

Covid 19 test

It ’s on these recently constitute criteria that Thursday ’s ruling is based . Corley decided that the Grubhub / Lawson relationship did n’t satisfy the so - calledABC testfor contract work and that Grubhub was n’t eligible for a business - to - business organization exception to the ABC’s . Under the test , a worker can only be think a contractor if they take on three requirements :

The proletarian is loose from the control and centering of the hire entity in link with the performance of the work , both under the contract for the carrying out of the work and in fact ;

The worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity ’s business ; and

Lenovo Ideapad Slim 3 15.6 Full Hd Touchscreen Laptop

The worker is customarily engaged in an severally establish trade , occupation , or business organisation of the same nature as that involved in the work performed .

manifestly , delivering food for Grubhub does relate to the company ’s main business . After all , that is Grubhub ’s intact business . The judge agree . “ The usual course of its business is join restaurants with diner to facilitate intellectual nourishment order . Food delivery is not outside the usual course of that business enterprise , ” rule Corley . “ Because Grubhub has not established Prong B , it does not play the ABC test and Mr. Lawson is properly classified as an employee for purposes of his minimum remuneration and overtime claims . ”

And though the question of “ employee or contractor ” is nail down for Lawson — the font is n’t quite over yet . The lawsuit is a Private Attorneys General Act ( PAGA ) compositor’s case , mean it seeks to recover penalties on behalf of the plaintiff and others in the same group ( i.e. Grubhub drivers ) who were open to labor code violations in California , explainedShannon Liss - Riordan , the lawyer be Lawson , to Gizmodo in an electronic mail .

Ankercompact

“ The first stage was for him to demonstrate he was an employee ( which we did , at last , after 8 years of litigation ! ) , ” wrote Liss - Riordan . “ I am looking fore to the next stage of the pillowcase , which will be to collect punishment for GrubHub ’s misclassification of driver across California for yr , ” she added

Per Liss - Riordan , Lawson ’s $ 65 win may be the first court ruling in the U.S. to deem a gig prole an employee for wage purpose . “ It is an important case law , ” she said .

However , the reach of that precedent is a little indecipherable given that Proposition 22 is still winding its style through California ’s court . The constabulary , passed as a ballot meter in 2020 , would essentially make lance worker society exempt from abiding by AB5.Prop 22 was recently upheldin a commonwealth court of appeals , after a lower court had deemed it unconstitutional . Another appeal is expected , which would push the case up to the Department of State ’s Supreme Court .

Ms 0528 Jocasta Vision Quest

“ open Prop 22 , the [ awarded ] punishment could likely at this point only go up until December 2020 . But there are still several years of penalties uncommitted , so the cost to GrubHub in this cause could be solid , ” clarified Liss - Riordan . “ It remains to be watch still whether the California Supreme Court will take up the constitutionality challenge to Prop 22 , ” she added .

The question of how company progress on the backs of gig workers have to categorize those drivers / couriers / Task Rabbits / etc … is a long - standing one that multiple states , not just California , have been grappling with . Last yr , Massachusetts ’ Supreme Courtruled against a ballot measurethat would ’ve show all gig worker as self-governing contractors . Other states , like Georgia , Alabama , and Florida havefavored the corporations .

Yet those state decisions could become moot if Biden ’s Department of Labor successfully institutes a proposedfederal rule guaranteeing gig workers employee status . Rideshare and deliverance caller have occur out in impregnable opposition to the rule . Most recently , Uber and Lyft ’s swap group have publiclyquestioned the meritof Biden ’s recent DOL nominee as the companies attempt to countermine worker right .

Xbox8tbstorage