Guerrero v. Superior Court

California established a social-welfare program to provide in-home support services (IHSS) to disabled persons. Under the program, individuals who provided services (providers) were compensated for their work. Although the State Department of Social Services was tasked with overseeing the program and creating regulations, individual counties administered the program, processing applications for IHSS, determining an individual’s needs, and authorizing services. State guidelines gave counties numerous options for administering the program, one of which was the establishment of a public authority. Adelina Tapia Guerrero (plaintiff) provided IHSS services in Sonoma County (the county) (defendant) under this program, but she was never paid. Guerrero sued for unpaid wages, bringing claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), California statutes, and an Industrial Welfare Commission wage order against the county, the county’s public authority, and two program recipients (defendants). Guerrero contended the county and the public authority were her joint employers. The superior court sustained the demurrer of real parties in interest to the Sonoma County Department of Human Services and the public authority, rejecting Guerrero’s contention that the county and public authority were her joint employers. Guerrero then filed an amended complaint substituting the county as a defendant.