The Follow-Up Call

I spoke with Governor Murphy's aides for a half hour yesterday about New Jersey's proposed independent-contractor rule. Here's what they said.

Last week, News12 New Jersey used my question in its “Ask Governor Murphy” segment on TV. My question was about the proposed independent-contractor rule at the New Jersey Department of Labor & Workforce Development, which Governor Phil Murphy personally oversees.

Murphy, in his live on-air response, said he would have his chief policy adviser, Dennis Zeveloff, follow up with me. It took a nudge on X this week to make that happen…

… and at 4:30 yesterday afternoon, that follow-up conversation occurred.

On the call were Zeveloff, myself and Bryan Marco, who is special counsel for rulemakings in Murphy’s office.

Here’s what they said during our half-hour talk.

The 2019 Task Force Report

I asked about the 2019 Report of Gov. Murphy’s Task Force on Employee Misclassification. I said that everyone agrees the majority of independent contractors are correctly classified as independent contractors—so why is the Murphy administration trying to reclassify so many of us as employees?

Zeveloff said the Labor Department’s intent is not to reclassify people. He said the department put out a proposal based on “how the case law has been operationalized” in New Jersey, and tried to propose a regulation to codify that.

I noted that the task force report includes several statistics that are at best questionable. I asked if Murphy’s office still stands by that report. Zeveloff said he had not seen any note or memo that described problems with that report.

(There are at least two public comments that describe such problems: this one that I wrote, and this one that describes concerns about the task force process.)

The Public Comments

It’s been three weeks since the public-comment period ended on August 6. Zeveloff said the Labor Department had received a “significant number” of comments. Neither he nor Marco could tell me how many comments. Marco said they amounted to “multiple thousands of pages.”

I said that David Fish at the Department of Labor had emailed several people to say the comments would be put online for free, so we could all see them. I asked when and how that would happen, and if it would happen before anything gets decided about the proposed independent-contractor rule. They said they were not sure.

(This morning, I received a reply to emails that I sent directly to David Fish. He wrote: “We anticipate posting the written comments on the Department’s website very shortly. When posted they would be located immediately adjacent to where the Department currently posts the Notice of Proposal and the audio of the public hearing. That is, on the Research and Information/Legal Notices page, under the heading, ‘2025 Notices of Proposal.’”)

‘All Sides’

I asked what Governor Murphy meant when he said on TV that his administration was taking public input on “all sides.” Zeveloff said there were a number of different concerns from a number of different industries, as well as from legislators.

I said that based on the public hearing testimony, there are only two sides:

• people employed by unions or with organizations that have strong union ties, who testified in support of this proposed rule

• everyone else, who testified in opposition by a 3-to-1 margin

Zeveloff said, “That’s helpful to know.”

Pluses and Minuses

I asked why Murphy said on TV that there are pluses and minuses to this proposal, because since this kind of policymaking went into effect in California, what we’ve seen are a lot of minuses. I noted:

• an Orange County Register analysis that showed California's pace of job creation tanked by 81% since then;

• California ranking dead last on job creation out of all the states a couple years ago;

• The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting that California is the worst state for unemployment, second only to the District of Columbia;

• union membership being down since this kind of policy went into effect.

I asked why Governor Murphy is trying to emulate the workforce policy of a state that’s failing miserably at workforce development. Zeveloff said he didn’t know if the Murphy administration was necessarily trying to emulate California, but that there may have been phrasing in the proposed independent-contractor rule that made it seem as if it could have a harmful impact.

(Some of the public comments that attorneys filed about that phrasing in the proposed rule are this one and this one and this one and this one.)

The U.S. Department of Justice

I asked whether Governor Murphy had any concerns, based on what’s been happening in California recently, about the U.S. Department of Justice coming into New Jersey to investigate this rule-making. I noted that:

• a California assemblyman recently wrote to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, asking the U.S. Department of Justice to launch an inquiry in California;

• the State of California was recently sued over claims of discrimination in this type of policymaking, with regard to the exemptions process;

• a report was released less than a year ago by members of the California Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, who cited a disproportionate impact with this type of policymaking on minorities, and who urged other states not to do what California did.

They said they were still reviewing the public comments.

Professional Exemptions

Given the mess that the exemption process in California continues to be, I asked if the Murphy administration was considering giving exemptions to some professions, but not to others, here in New Jersey. They said they’re evaluating the comments.

I asked whether Murphy’s team had spoken with anyone in the TV and film industry. The governor has seemed excited about a deal to turn the old Fort Monmouth into a Netflix studio, but more than 50 professions from the TV and film industry were affected by this kind of policymaking in California. They said they were still reviewing the public comments.

I said that in California, more than 600 affected professions had been identified. I asked how many the Murphy administration had met with about the proposed rule.

Zeveloff said they’d had about a dozen meetings, and they generally try to take meetings if people reach out.

I said I’d be happy to come to Trenton, and a lot of people would be happy to come with me, if Governor Murphy was willing to sit down and discuss this with us. They did not offer to schedule any such meeting.

Letters and Legislation

I asked whether the Murphy administration had seen the letters issued by nearly two dozen Democrats and Republicans in the New Jersey Legislature who have now publicly raised concerns. They said they had seen those letters, and their colleagues had spoken with lawmakers as part of their review process.

Zeveloff also said there is a question of whether the Legislature will act. I asked why the Legislature would need to act if the Murphy administration simply rescinds its proposal, as it is being urged to do. Zeveloff said the Legislature always has the opportunity to advance legislative proposals.

I asked if he expects that to happen. He said not necessarily.

Timing of Next Steps

I asked about Governor Murphy’s statement on TV that this rule-making process was going to play out over the next few weeks, and if the administration plans to make a final decision on the proposed rule sometime in September.

They said all proposals are valid for a year, and they have no timeline for next steps.

My Final Questions

I asked if they felt that what they’ve done seems like a reasonable amount of effort, given how much damage this proposal could cause in the lives of people like me—threatening the way I pay my mortgage, my health-insurance premiums, my grocery bills, everything. They said they take these kinds of concerns seriously, and they’re reviewing everything that they have received.

I noted that these concerns are not new. We also had a public hearing in 2019, when we all testified at the State House for more than four hours straight. Zeveloff said they’re evaluating people’s responses.

I again said that many of us would be happy to go to Trenton and sit down face-to-face with Governor Murphy for meetings. Zeveloff said he could not speak to the governor’s schedule, but if people want to set up meetings, they should email him. He said it’s OK for me to share his email address.

You can reach him at Dennis.Zeveloff@nj.gov.