Bradley v. Networkers International, LLC
211 Cal. App. 4th 1129
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Plaintiffs filed a class action against Networkers alleging wage/hour violations (overtime, meal/rest breaks, records, waiting time, UCL).
- Class certification was denied; the court found no predominance due to individualized issues.
- California Supreme Court Brinker clarified meal/rest-break standards and class-certification considerations.
- Class members were hired under an Independent Contractor Agreement (IC) portraying independent contractor status; later some were reclassified as employees.
- Evidence showed a uniform companywide practice with no meal/rest-break policy and no recordkeeping; plaintiffs alleged actual practice contradicted IC terms.
- Court remanded to reconsider certification in light of Brinker and Brinker-related authorities, limiting issues to off-the-clock claims for possible retainment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do common issues predominate on independent contractor/employee status? | Bradley argues uniform control and conduct show common proof. | Networkers argues variations among workers require individualized proof. | Yes; predominance exists for independent contractor/employee issue. |
| Do meal and rest break claims predominate as a class? | Uniform lack of policy shows common liability. | Possible individual defenses about breaks; no uniform policy shown. | Predominance shown; Brinker guidance applies; remand on issues where needed. |
| Can overtime damages be calculated on a class-wide basis? | Payroll records enable uniform calculation of unpaid overtime. | Damages depend on individual hour records and testimony. | Yes; damages calculable from payroll data; common issue supports class treatment. |
| Should off-the-clock claims be certified or remanded? | Off-the-clock evidence could be shown by uniform policy. | Off-the-clock claims depend on supervisor actions; not uniform. | Remand to address off-the-clock issues separately. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, 53 Cal.4th 1004 (Cal. 2012) (clarified meal/rest-break rules and class-certification scope; uniform policies amenable to class treatment)
- Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Dep’t of Industrial Relations, 48 Cal.3d 341 (Cal. 1989) (test for employee vs. independent contractor; multiple factors governs control)
- Martinez v. Combs, 49 Cal.4th 35 (Cal. 2010) (defined employer for wage-order claims; broad control standard)
- Jaimez v. Daiohs USA, Inc., 181 Cal.App.4th 1286 (Cal.App.4th 2010) (uniform policies supporting class treatment on breaks; damages may be individual)
- Bufil v. Dollar Financial Group, Inc., 162 Cal.App.4th 1193 (Cal.App.4th 2008) (supports class treatment where uniform policy violated wage laws)