Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The material part is that it's clearer. That means most such decisions don't require litigation. The result will be that blatant violations of the law get resolved fast.


Such as? Uber seems in the clear (I direct the driver not Uber), I cant think of any material cases where this matters

By the way, that’s really good for Uber drivers. If they had to be employees they would get paid less and couldn’t deduct many expenses


Not exactly. The prior test used in California already looked at who had the right to control or direct the work of the putative contractor. The new test requires the company to prove that it does not fundamentally control or direct the performance of work, as well as prove that the other 2 factors of the ABC test also do not apply.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: