Amplex Group Services Please Do Not Work For This Company Brea CA

While it's true that AB5, which was implemented in California in 2020, has imposed strict criteria for determining whether a worker should be classified as an independent contractor or an employee, it's important to consider the full context and nuances of the law. The claim that AB5 automatically eliminates the possibility of being an independent contractor is oversimplified. AB5’s Application: AB5 is based on the "ABC test," which is designed to determine whether a worker is truly an independent contractor or an employee. The test requires that all three conditions must be met for a worker to qualify as a contractor: A: The worker must be free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in performing the work. B: The worker must perform work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business. C: The worker must be customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed. If the work you’re doing meets all three of these criteria, then you may still qualify as an independent contractor despite AB5’s stricter provisions. Control and Direction: The claim that you are working "under their control" could be a valid argument for employee classification, but it's not a definitive factor in all cases. Many contractors work under some level of direction from a client without losing their independent contractor status. The specifics of your working arrangement would need to be evaluated to assess the level of control and whether it truly impacts your classification. Uniforms and Representation: Wearing a company uniform or working on behalf of the company does not automatically make you an employee. Many contractors are required to dress a certain way or adhere to guidelines for professional representation, but that alone does not determine employment status under AB5. California’s Legal Landscape: While AB5 has made it more difficult to classify workers as independent contractors, certain exemptions and industries (such as professional services, certain gig economy roles, and other exceptions) are still able to use the independent contractor classification. It’s important to consult with an attorney to evaluate whether your specific role falls into one of these exempt categories or if there are other legal avenues that might justify your contractor status. The Employer’s Choices: The idea that the employer will "shut their doors in CA" or be "heavily fined" is an oversimplification. While there have been cases of companies settling disputes over misclassification, many businesses have also adjusted their operations, restructured their workforce, or found other ways to comply with AB5 without resorting to drastic measures like closing down. The legal landscape is constantly evolving, and it’s possible that exceptions or amendments could be made to AB5 that might impact its enforcement or interpretation. PAGA and Other Legal Remedies: While it’s true that workers in California can seek legal recourse under PAGA (Private Attorneys General Act), this is a complex legal area that requires careful consideration of the facts and circumstances surrounding the classification. If workers believe they’ve been misclassified, it is still essential to evaluate their individual situation with a qualified labor attorney to determine the best course of action. In conclusion, while AB5 imposes stricter regulations regarding independent contractor classification, it’s important to consider all the factors that determine whether or not someone qualifies as an independent contractor. Legal advice from a qualified attorney who understands California labor law is crucial to understanding whether a misclassification has occurred and what legal remedies might be available.

The claim that Ron Prosser, CEO of Amplex Group Services, intentionally exploits contractors by pushing liability onto them and minimizing the company’s responsibilities overlooks some important realities of the contractor model. Here are a few counterpoints to consider: Flexibility and Autonomy of Contractors: Contractors often choose their working arrangement because it provides them with a level of flexibility and independence that traditional employees do not have. While it’s true that contractors are responsible for their own taxes and benefits, many appreciate the ability to set their own schedules, pick and choose clients, and sometimes even earn more than traditional employees due to the higher hourly rates contractors are often paid. Company Policies and Standardization: When contractors are required to adhere to company policies, such as uniform requirements or client expectations, this is often a necessary part of maintaining professionalism and ensuring consistency in the service provided. These policies are no different from the expectations placed on employees in many industries and ensure that the company maintains a unified approach to client relationships. Liability and Risk: Contractors understand that they take on more risk than employees, which is part of the reason they can often negotiate higher pay rates. While it’s unfortunate if technicians have been stranded or treated unfairly, this behavior, if true, is a matter of operational management rather than an inherent flaw in the contractor model itself. The majority of contractors choose this path knowing the risks involved and are compensated accordingly. Shell Companies and Legal Defense: The mention of a shell company and legal defenses implies a strategy to evade legal responsibility, but it's important to note that there are many legitimate reasons for using a separate legal entity, especially for liability protection. Many companies utilize separate entities for tax planning, risk management, and other legal advantages, which is standard business practice. The assertion of unlawful business practices should be backed by clear evidence, and without specific proof of any wrongdoing, such claims remain speculative. The Value Proposition for Contractors: While the recruiter may highlight the advantages of being a contractor—such as flexibility and pay—the reality is that these benefits are true for many. Contractors often have the ability to work for multiple companies, set their own hours, and maximize their income potential, which can outweigh the lack of benefits or job security. It’s a trade-off that many choose willingly for the sake of independence. Response to Regulatory Changes: The passage of new regulations, especially in states like California, is important to consider. Companies must adjust to these changes, and while it may require modifications to their business model, this isn’t inherently malicious or exploitative. It’s simply a response to evolving legal frameworks around contractor classifications. In conclusion, while there may be isolated cases of misconduct, the general contractor model provides flexibility and opportunities that many choose voluntarily. If there are concerns about legal compliance or ethical practices, these should be handled by regulatory bodies. However, the argument that the entire business model is designed to exploit contractors overlooks the choice many make to work in this capacity and the legitimate reasons for structuring the business as such.

Jim,

Glad you chimed in on your knowledge, however whom ever is making false statements about our company is mistaken and does not have complete knowledge of our operation.

Have a great day

You are correct as Amplex does not hire independent contractors all our staff are employees.

 These statements are not true as we dont hire Independent contractors from Amplex Group Services. We are a well respected company with over 20 plus years in business.

https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/New_York_State_New_York_County_Supreme_Court/656227---2017/AMERICAN_EXPRESS_TRAVEL_RELATED_SERVICES_COMPANY_INC._v._AMPLEX_GROUP_SERVICES_INC./

https://unicourt.com/case/urc-GBFR6IZKJBET2FT4IA4GVDLNMVNBE0962#dockets

https://unicourt.com/case/urc-EQ7RGFZJHIVUCHL5MEWGHASXLNFAM1040#dockets

https://unicourt.com/case/urc-FBBROGZNHYXUKIMBMUYGRBTFMZEQU1053#dockets

If you've been doing this work for this person in 2020, then I would find a labor attorney for a really important reason - you would not be a contractor.  Under AB5, which took effect in 2020, it has become almost impossible for you to be considered a contractor under California law.  Evidence of this would include:

• Working at the explicit direction of the company under their control
• Wearing the company "uniform" when at a customer's site

It doesn't matter what Federal law is in this matter.  CA law makes this pretty clear.  Their high-priced lawyer won't stand a chance against AB5; there have already been multiple companies fined by the state and settling cases like this out of court in CA.  Make sure you find a lawyer who can take the case on contingency; not only will they be heavily fined, BUT they will owe all of the taxes, SDI, etc....you've been burdened with.  You may even be able to ue under PAGA which really screws the employer.

And no, AB5 will not work in their favor.  They have a couple of choices:  they can either shut their doors in CA, or start hiring their contractors.  Even if they happen to locate themselves in NV, they can't avoid AB5 if they're doing work in CA.  To be honest, they'll probably shutter their doors in CA because the type of work they do would be too expensive to perform in CA since everyone needs to be an employee.

If you haven't done work in 2020 for them, then you can't really sue.  But I would encourage those who still work there...to sue if they're still contractors.  They have to be employees now.