Legal News

Ninth Circuit Says FedEx Drivers are Employees, Not Independent Contractors
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)


Summary: Ninth Circuit remands back cases to lower courts after ruling FedEx drivers should be classified as employees and not as independent contractors.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a finding in a multidistrict litigation in Indiana and found that the close to 2,700 plaintiffs in two federal district court cases had been wrongly classified as independent contractors.


According to the court, FedEx drivers fulfilled the requirements of the “right to control” test applicable to both California and Oregon, and are to be treated as employees for the purposes of classifying them.

The three-judge panel also commented that FedEx drivers were employees both under the “right-to-control,” and “economic-realities” tests and the fact that FedEx termed them as “independent contractors” in an operating agreement did not change their real status as employees of the company.

The Ninth Circuit also found that one of the classes lacked Article III standing to seek prospective relief and the other class’s claims for prospective relief became moot before the Multidistrict Litigation Court certified the class.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!

The consolidated appeal to the Ninth Circuit by FedEx drivers, in essence, claimed that FedEx improperly classifies its drivers as independent contractors, thereby forcing them to incur business expenses and depriving them of benefits otherwise owed to employees.

Between 2003 and 2009, similar cases had been filed against FedEx in approximately forty states. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated those cases for multidistrict litigation proceedings in the District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. The plaintiffs in all the MDL cases moved for partial summary judgment seeking to establish their status as a matter of law.

The MDL Court denied nearly all of such motions and granted almost all cross-motions made by FedEx. The plaintiffs appealed in time challenging the MDL Court’s denial of their partial motions and blanket grant of summary judgments to FedEx.

The Ninth Circuit has remanded the matters back to lower courts, after holding they erred in not treating FedEx drivers as employees.


Interesting Legal Sites You May Like




Search Now

Personal Injury Attorney with 3+ Years of Experience

USA-CA-Sherman Oaks

Sherman Oaks office of our client is seeking a personal injury attorney with 3+ years of CA experien...

Apply Now

Senior Trust and Estate Attorney/ Of Counsel

USA-CA-San Diego

San Diego office is seeking a trust and estate attorney at either the senior associate or of counsel...

Apply Now

Mid-level Litigation Securities Associate Attorney

USA-NY-New York City

New York City office of an AmLaw firm seeks Mid-level Litigation Securities Associate Attorney with ...

Apply Now


Litigation Legal Assistant


Immediate Opening! 2-3 years of experience as a legal assistant is required. At Lukins & Annis, w...

Apply now

Litigation Attorneys

USA-CA-Pleasant Hill

Civil litigation defense firm with offices in Contra Costa and Solano Counties, seeking litigation a...

Apply now

Senior Litigation Associate Attorney

USA-CA-Los Angeles

Gaglione, Dolan & Kaplan is looking to hire an associate attorney with 5 + years experience in insur...

Apply now

Associate Attorney


Manning Gross + Massenburg LLP (MG+M) is currently recruiting a junior to mid-level Associate for ou...

Apply now

Most Popular


To Top