Legal Question in Employment Law in California

Re: Car insurance req. exceed state min. as cond. of employment?

This is a difficult question to answered, because the question, as stated, has never been presented to a court for a published decision. The labor code requires an employer to indemnify its employees for costs, expenses and losses associated with their employment. Theoretically, excessive insurance beyond what an employee would select for themselves, would be an additional expense the employer should have to cover. If you are in an automobile accident on company time, the employer probably will be responsible, regardless of whether you personally have insurance or not. Another factor for consideration is that an employer cannot require an employee to provide their own "tools" to do the job, unless the employee receives twice minimum-wage. Although there are many factors to consider and research, it would appear the employer's requirements attempt to pass on "the cost of doing business" to its employees, which is illegal in California.

Re: Car insurance req. exceed state min. as cond. of employment?

I can't say that I have any specific knowledge on the legality of requiring your auto insurance to be the primary carrier, but requiring the higher insurance coverage as a condition of employment is certainly legal. The employer is strictly liable for any injuries you cause in the scope & authority of your employment. They are trying to keep their own insurance costs down by spreading out the risk of loss if you screw up while driving.

In my opinion, is borders on immoral to have just the minimum coverage anyway. As far as I am concerned the statutory minimum should be raised to 100,000/300,000.