CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant was an employee, not an independent contractor, on the date of injury. The Board deferred to the judge's credibility findings and adopted their report which detailed evidence of employer control. This evidence included provided training, the employer owning and insuring the vehicle, and dictating job pricing. The judge found the applicant's apparent freedom to choose routes and schedules to be illusory given the obligation to meet client demands without delay.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant was an employee, not an independent contractor, on the date of injury. The Board deferred to the judge's credibility findings and adopted their report which detailed evidence of employer control. This evidence included provided training, the employer owning and insuring the vehicle, and dictating job pricing. The judge found the applicant's apparent freedom to choose routes and schedules to be illusory given the obligation to meet client demands without delay.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.