Supreme Court Refused To Take Up AB5 - California Truckers Screwed

[Mike]

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a trucking industry group's claims that California's strict worker classification law is preempted by federal regulations governing truckers' working conditions.

The court denied a petition for certiorari by the California Trucking Association, which claimed the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' April ruling upholding the law known as AB5 threatens the longstanding "owner-operator" model in which drivers who own their trucks work as independent contractors.

The CTA said AB5 is preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA), which also applies to the trucking industry and bars states from enacting laws that dictate the prices, routes and services offered by motor carriers.

The 9th Circuit said generally applicable laws may have some indirect effects on how companies operate, but fall well within states' powers to regulate employment relationships.

No SCOTUS review of California law's impact on trucking industry

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a trucking company's claims that California's strict worker classification law is preempted by federal regulations governing truckers' working conditions.

www.reuters.com

 

[Mike]

Guess it is safe to say that the wave is officially starting. California Trucking Association fought it to the top, and got rejected by the highest court. You know other states were watching this closely.

 

[mndriver]

It could be a blessing in disguise too.

For decades drivers have been “exempt “ from wage and labor laws.

This may be the initiative to change those laws and classification.

 

[Mike]

It could be a blessing in disguise too.

For decades drivers have been “exempt “ from wage and labor laws.

This may be the initiative to change those laws and classification.

How do wage and labor laws have any bearing on people trying to run their own business?

 

[mndriver]

If they are now forced to be classified as “employees “….

 

[Mike]

If they are now forced to be classified as “employees “….

I don't think that will do anything.

What I see is people either getting their own authority, or going to the antique method of leasing the equipment to the company and then being hired as a company driver. Not sure why anyone would want to own a truck, then deal with that crazy process of years ago.

 

[Hammer166]

I think it was a mistake to try and get cute with their argument. This should have been attacked on freedom of association grounds.

Makes one wonder if OOIDA helped them craft their legal arguments.

 

[Mike]

I think it was a mistake to try and get cute with their argument. This should have been attacked on freedom of association grounds.

Makes one wonder if OOIDA helped them craft their legal arguments.

OOIDA, early on, was very quick to push the idea of owner operators leasing their equipment to the carrier and then hiring on as a company driver like was done years ago.

This, if it goes nationwide, kills lease purchase programs, which I have no real problem with other than the fact that government shouldn't be getting telling people how to run their business. I do have a problem with it in that not all lease purchase programs are bad. It has been abused, but those doing it right shouldn't be punished.

 

[Electric Chicken]

Maybe it'll be a good thing the way some of these companies have people who like to micromanage their owner ops as if they're company drivers.

It's like okay you wanna treat me like I'm a company driver and hound me, you can pay me like one. I'll take my medical dental vision, paid vacation, time and a half, etc.

Don't try to tell me I'm in control when it's either this load or no load at all. Or I can't PC all I want due to company policy.

 

[Duck]

California Trucking Association AB5 case still pending

Although the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition regarding AB5 on Oct. 4, the California Trucking Association’s case is still pending.

landline.media

The Supreme Court on Oct. 4 denied a petition from Cal Cartage Transportation Express to hear the trucking company’s case that California’s AB5 is preempted by federal law.

The California Trucking Association’s case, which is tied to the injunction, is still pending.​

There was some confusion regarding which case had been denied, as Reuters published a story on Oct. 4 that the high court had rejected the California Trucking Association’s petition. The trucking group told Land Line on Oct. 5 that the Reuters report was incorrect and that they aren’t expecting to hear a decision on the case until late November or early December. Reuters corrected its article on the afternoon of Oct. 5.