Is section 8 of the California Code of Civil Procedure sufficient to grant employees and independent contractors rights against private parties who hire them?

4 Citing Rojo, appellant suggests that section 8 grants employees and independent contractors rights against private parties who hire them. However, although the court in Rojo stated in dicta that section 8 "covers private as well as state action," the Rojo court did not resolve whether section 8 grants such rights. (See Rojo v. Kliger, supra, 52 Cal.3d at pp. 89-90, 276 Cal.Rptr. 130, 801 P.2d 373.) We are unaware of any case since Rojo in which the court squarely has decided this issue, as opposed to holding that section 8 expresses a policy supporting a Tameny action against a private employer. Because a policy consideration supporting a Tameny claim must be "articulated at the time of the discharge" (Stevenson v. Superior Court, supra, 16 Cal.4th at p. 893, 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 888, 941 P.2d 1157), we do not address the scope of the rights that section 8 accords, and restrict our inquiry to determining the limits of the policy that it expresses.