Laserfiche WebLink
0 0 Confidential <br />handling of the non -employee relationships is achievable and <br />it is Project Partners' area of specialty. <br />1.2.1 Background on the MWD and Other Class <br />Action Lawsuits <br />MWD is involved in a class action lawsuit regarding its use of <br />contract and temporary employees. In the early '90s, MWD <br />used several consulting firms and temporary agencies to <br />obtain contract staff to assist its own staff in designing and <br />building the East Side Reservoir (now called Diamond Valley <br />Lake). After the project was essentially over, several "non - <br />employee" members of the project team filed a class action <br />lawsuit against MWD stating that they are entitled to the <br />benefits given to regular or full time MWD employees. <br />CalPERS joined in the suit and, surprisingly sided with the <br />"non -employees." <br />In February 2001, a Los Angeles Superior Court ruled against <br />MWD. Its decision stated that non -employees, who meet the <br />common law test, must be considered "common law <br />employees" and, thus, enrolled in CalPERS. <br />MWD immediately moved to appeal the case. The State <br />Association of Counties (CSAC) and the League of Cities, <br />along with more than a hundred other organizations, <br />municipalities and special districts, assisted MWD in <br />convincing the Appeals Court to accept the case by filing an <br />amicus curiae brief. The brief encouraged the Appeals Court <br />to 1) hear the case and 2) reverse the lower court's decision. <br />This action was successful as the Appeals Court accepted the <br />case in April 2001. But unfortunately in the October 2001 <br />ruling, the Court sided completely with the Superior Court. The <br />Appeals court ruling has greater impact than the previous <br />ruling because, unlike decisions of the lower or Superior <br />Court, those of the Appeals Court are precedent setting. <br />Consequently, they carry much more legal weight. <br />Shortly after the Appeals Court ruling, several "non - <br />employees" working at the City of Pasadena's Water and <br />Power Department filed a class action lawsuit which is <br />essentially identical to the MWD lawsuit. In this lawsuit <br />(Ramirez v. City of Pasadena), individuals are demanding <br />retroactive access to the benefit package afforded to <br />permanent employees of the City of Pasadena. <br />Concurrently, several "non -employees" initiated a class action <br />lawsuit against the County of Los Angeles (Shiel v. County of <br />Los Angeles) for access to County benefit programs. <br />Project Partners Proposal for Temporary Engineering and Technical Support Services <br />City of Santa Ana <br />Section 1 Page 4 <br />