This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
News

Labor/Employment

Feb. 10, 2020

Teamsters protest AB 5 injunction in truckers spat with AG

“Even though the preliminary injunction is against the State, the only party moving to stay the order is the Teamsters,” according to a California Trucking Association’s response to the union’s ex parte application.

The Teamsters have asked a Southern District judge to suspend a preliminary injunction on Assembly Bill 5, but a response filed by the California Trucking Association asks why the union, an intervenor-defendant, is asking for the suspension instead of the state defendant itself.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters submitted its ex parte application to the federal court Feb. 4, noting that the union, along with the state defendants in California Trucking Association v. Becerra, 18-CV02485 (S.D. Cal., filed Oct. 25, 2018) had each separately filed appeals of the injunction on Jan. 29.

The filings came less than two weeks after U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez ordered the preliminary injunction, which bars the state from enforcing AB 5 on motor carriers, including trucking companies and independent owner-operator truck drivers. AB 5 went into effect on Jan. 1, and automatically categorizes workers as employees unless they pass a three-part "ABC" test to establish their status as independent contractors.

"Even though the preliminary injunction is against the state, the only party moving to stay the order is the Teamsters," according to the California Trucking Association's response to the ex parte application filed Thursday. "The state's absence is telling. If the state needed a stay, then the state defendants could have submitted their own request, with supporting arguments, for the court's consideration."

An attorney who filed the application on behalf of the union, Stacey M. Leyton of Altshuler Berzon LLP, said in an interview Friday she doesn't know whether the attorney general plans to file his own motion to stay the preliminary injunction.

Leyton said the union filed its own application independent of the state because it has its own stake in getting the preliminary injunction lifted.

"The truckers who the Teamsters represent and advocate on behalf of are certainly affected by the injunction to the extent that state officials can't enforce AB 5," she said. "That means that workers cannot file wage claims and expect state officials to apply the state standard for when they are misclassified."

The union's application noted the court is "empowered to suspend a preliminary injunction that has been appealed."

In its response, the California Trucking Association said, "The Teamsters do not explain why they have standing to challenge a preliminary injunction order that does not apply to them."

The attorney general did not respond to a request for comment Friday.

-- Jessica Mach

#356230

Jessica Mach

Daily Journal Staff Writer
jessica_mach@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com