Republish
California must provide workers with flexibility
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
California must provide workers with flexibility
Share this:
By Shannon Grove
Shannon Grove is Senate Republican Leader and represents Senate District 16 in Kern, Tulare and San Bernardino counties. Senator.Grove@senate.ca.gov. She wrote this commentary for CALmatters.
Single mothers drive for Uber and Lyft because they are able to choose when they work, on their own terms.
They might only work while their children are at school or with a babysitter. They might want to work more or less, depending on their children’s schedule, or limit work to the most profitable times of the day.
Moms often choose to work as independent contractors because they can prioritize their families’ needs. However, that is about to change. Unfortunately, a 2018 decision by the California Supreme Court, Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, puts their ability to have a flexible workplace at risk.
Under the Dynamex ruling, moms who work in between other responsibilities could lose their independence.
The Dynamex decision creates a three-part test to establish whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee. The distinction between independent contractor and employee is important because it determines the work-life patterns of millions of Californians.
This new test makes it so millions of independent contractors now would have to be classified as employees. As regular employees, they would need their employer’s permission to modify a typical nine to five day.
Prior to the Dynamex decision, independent contractors and employers were able to operate with flexibility that benefited both parties.
I have proposed a solution to this career-altering decision, in Senate Bill 238, set for a hearing on Wednesday. If the bill were to become law, California’s test for employment status would match the test established by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
This bill would allow hard-working Californians to be independent contractors again and allow individuals to choose how they want to work.
According to a 2018 Bureau of Labor Statistics Economic report, 79 percent of independent contractors prefer their current work situation to traditional employment. A 2017 survey revealed that most full-time workers who left their jobs made more money as a freelancer within a year.
Unfortunately, because of the Dynamex decision, nearly 2 million Californians are at risk of losing their ability to work on their own terms and make more money.
Californians in all types of industries are affected, including barbers and hairstylists, farmers, educators, health care professionals, construction workers, and artists.
Many college students work between classes to help pay their bills. Unfortunately, the Dynamex decision will disproportionately affect them and other younger workers.
Instead of interpreting the law, the California Supreme Court simply re-wrote it. Creating laws is a job given to the California Legislature, which is why good policy is necessary to fix this bad court decision.
Our economy and workforce are transforming, especially in California. We cannot restrict workplace flexibility with bad court rulings. Instead, we need to ensure Californians have the opportunity to choose the terms on which they work.
Senate Bill 238 is a necessary first step to protect workers’ rights and freedom.