If Avendano, 34, had worked for a company that would have called him an employee, his family would be entitled to a work allowance and they would receive part of his salary. But he worked for Caviar, a San Francisco-based on-demand delivery service that has grown over the past decade and built its business model on a staff of independent contractors. Caviar does not pay for gas. As an independent supplier, you are also responsible for the maintenance of the gas and the car for Caviar during the journey. Some ride-sharing companies like Lyft offer their drivers rewards and perks, including a discount on gas. Avendano was one of those contractors who worked in what is called the Gig Economy. This means that he has not received benefits that most employees do, such as health insurance, paid leisure or workers` allowances. == Judge Elizabeth Laporte rejected the plaintiffs` allegation that Caviar`s arbitration agreement, which prohibits the class action, was “imbued” with scruples. The judge noted that it met the minimum fairness requirements set by the California Supreme Court and noted that the agreement provided for the same types of relief that would be available in court, did not impose undue fees on plaintiffs, and provided for neutral arbitrators. Nevertheless, the distinction between the worker and the self-employed contractor is a subject that is being discussed in courts throughout the country, with new interest due to the increase in the number of companies that employ contractors. Caviar was among the online food delivery services challenged in 2015 in court or arbitration in San Francisco for calling their workers independent contractors. Finally, the California Supreme Court passed a decision that will make it harder for companies to treat their employees as contractors. The question was whether Lawson was a worker subject to certain legal safeguards or a self-employed contractor.
In its decision, the court primarily considered Grubhub`s right to control Lawson as well as other secondary factors as part of california`s classification test, called the Borello test. After a trial, the judge found that “taking into account all Borello factors as a whole in light of the trial record, the court finds that Grubhub has its burden of showing that . . .