Vietnamese American manicurists, salon owners sue California alleging labor code is discriminatory
Several Vietnamese American-owned nail salons in Orange County have sued California, alleging the state's labor code is discriminating against their businesses.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana on Friday, alleges that the state's labor code violates the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law by forcing nail technicians to be classified as employees.
The suit argues that professionals in the beauty industry for years have operated as independent contractors, renting space in a salon and bringing in their own clients. That changed at the beginning of 2025, when nail technicians in the labor code became required to be classified as employees, the lawsuit said.
California Assemblyman Tri Ta (R-Westminster), who represents Little Saigon and surrounding communities, said his office has fielded much concern from Vietnamese American nail salon owners.
'Their lives have turned upside down overnight,' Ta said at a news conference Monday morning. 'It is not just unfair, it is discrimination.'
The switch in labor law came back in 2019, when a sweeping law governing worker classification rules across various industries called Assembly Bill 5 was approved — a law that codified a California Supreme Court decision creating a stricter test to judge whether a worker should be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor.
AB 5 sought to crack down on industries where many workers are misclassified as independent contractors, who are not afforded protections including minimum wage, overtime pay and workers' compensation that employees have access to. But various industries have said AB 5 targets them unfairly, creating an uneven playing field for businesses.
Some professions received carve-outs, including doctors, accountants, real estate agents and hairdressers; while others such as truckers, commercial janitors and physical therapists must abide by the tighter classification rules.
Some implementation of the law was staggered to give industries, including nail technicians, time to adapt.
The lawsuit describes how the nail salon industry in California became dominated by Vietnamese workers in recent decades, when Vietnamese refugees began fleeing to the U.S. in large numbers in 1975 after the fall of Saigon in America's failed military intervention in Southeast Asia.
The industry 'has become synonymous with the Vietnamese community,' the lawsuit said, with more than 82% of all nail technicians in California being Vietnamese American, and some 85% women.
The businesses that filed suit include multiple locations of Blue Nail Bar, Happy Nails & Spa and Holly and Hudson Nail Lounge.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Journals
an hour ago
- Business Journals
3 simple steps for employers to lower health care costs and ensure better employee care
It's no secret that the current health care system is unsustainable. Nearly half of Americans receive health care coverage through their employer and over the past two decades, employer-sponsored health care costs have risen by over 200%. Many businesses can no longer front the costs — and the burden is being shifted onto employees. The result? Health care has become unaffordable for many working Americans — for some employees cost shifting has made engaging care unaffordable and 40% of American adults are struggling with medical debt — a shockingly high number. Despite this astronomical rise in cost, most brokers and benefits consultants haven't changed the solutions they present to clients in decades. In our experience, only about 5-10% of brokers are offering their clients innovative alternatives and even fewer have fully embraced a different approach, leading to poor implementation and support when they do try something new. The reality is that health care operates as an inefficient market. Unlike most industries, higher costs do not necessarily equate to higher quality care — in fact, it can often be the opposite. We believe that by being proactive, transparent and strategic, employers can reverse this trend by reducing costs while ensuring their employees receive top-quality care. However, achieving transformational results demands a completely different approach. The four of us have spent years in this industry and have tailored a unique approach that enables us to achieve superior results. We've seen what works and what doesn't and the ineffective options continually peddled to employers. That's why we've joined forces to help employers to take control of their health care spend and save real money. Our approach We don't believe in a one-size-fits all health plans and we partner with HR leaders to bring their health care strategy to life while directly administering the change. This includes educating employees on what they need to know to make the most of their benefits. When you show people exactly how they can receive better care at a lower price, everyone wins. Our model is built on three pillars: education, pharmacy platform and Medicare Plus. Education: We empower members to navigate the health care system effectively and steer them towards high quality and cost-effective options. Navigating the health care system is hard and we take a hands-on approach, which helps members understand their choices and make informed decisions. This extra effort improves health outcomes while ensuring the best experience possible. According to publicly available data compiled by Image360, CT scans in Tampa, Florida, are typically billed between $4,500 and $9,700. Even after PPO discounts, health plan members and businesses still pay $2,200 to $4,800. The problem is, there's little transparency in pricing and high cost doesn't guarantee high quality. Imagine360 changes that. With Imagine360, the average cost for the same CT scan at the same facility drops to under $200. This translates to significant savings for the employee and the business. Pharmacy platform: Pharmacy spend is the fastest-growing expense when it comes to a health plan. Traditional solutions often lack transparency and instead function as profit centers. We craft innovative solutions to manage pharmacy costs, ensuring that members have access to affordable medications without compromising on quality. Medicare Plus: We provide a thoughtful alternative to conventional PPOs. This model offers robust coverage at significantly lower costs by anchoring reimbursements to fair, Medicare-based rates. The above approach collectively has proven to cut costs by nearly 25% on average. Through this approach, we've reduced the cost of health care so drastically that some clients now offer no-cost health care to all of their employees. At a time when most companies are forcing employees to pay upwards of thousands of dollars per month on health insurance premiums, our clients pick up the full cost of premiums for their employees. This difference is life-changing for many families. By adopting a three-pillar approach to health care benefits, these businesses have become highly sought-after employers in their communities. And it's not just beneficial for employees — it's advantageous for the health plan as well. When health care premiums are overpriced, only the highest utilizers enroll, which makes sense; you would only pay thousands of dollars a month in premiums if you anticipated high health care expenses. However, when coverage is affordable and well-structured, everyone participates, creating a healthier, more predictable and sustainable plan. If this sounds too good to be true, you're not alone. One employer came to us frustrated and skeptical. Every broker had pitched the same traditional solutions, none of which solved their problem. Their chief financial officer knew that if they could not control hospital claims costs, the business would be in trouble. We introduced Medicare Plus pricing as a strategic solution. We helped manage the learning curve for the first few months — but once leadership committed to the solution, the plan started working. Three years in, premiums, deductibles and copays have all dropped. Employees are getting better coverage, and the company has even added new benefits — while most of their peers are cutting back. Using an independent TPA Working with an independent third-party administrator (TPA) opens the door to a different and better playbook. Yes, it takes more work upfront — more education, communication, teamwork — but the payoff is worth it: a more flexible employee benefits solution that can lead to better care, lower costs, and long-term consistency. No more carrier swaps or yearly overhauls. We currently support 25 clients on this platform. With dedicated service teams, personalized enrollment education and long-term strategies, we help employers innovate — without impacting employee satisfaction. The result is a smoother, more positive experience. The road ahead We're all fighting the same fight: pushing back against a system that hides cost, limits choices, wastes money and is driving people to choose little or no coverage due to cost. But it doesn't have to be this way. With a three-pronged approach including employee education, pharmacy and Medicare Plus pricing, we're helping employers take back control of their health care costs. By putting people first and staying committed to value-based solutions, employers and brokers can finally break free from the old playbook — and build something better. McGriff is a Marsh & McLennan Agency LLC Company. Our solutions include commercial property and casualty, corporate bonding and surety, cyber, executive risk, management and professional liability, captives and alternative risk transfer programs, employee benefits, small business and personal lines insurance.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful." 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes , as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation . The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful.' 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
