Under Lab. Code 2785, the exemptions are retroactive. Here, a securities investment advisor with a registered broker-dealer (one of the exempt categories) sued for wage and hour violations which occurred before the exemption was enacted. This decision holds that section 2785, making the exemption retroactive, is constitutional. There was a rational basis for treating securities investment advisors differently; hence, the exemption was not an equal protection violation. Financial professionals have more skill and bargaining power than many other workers and so don’t need wage and hour protections afforded other workers. On rational basis review, a legislative choice is not subject to courtroom factfinding and may be based on rational speculation unsupported by empirical data. Section 2785 does not violate due process by making the exemption retroactive. Workers have no vested right in application of one or another test of employee status. And there is no reason why a worker should be allowed to stop the clock on an evolving legal landscape at the point when it favors him. (But see Hall v. Cultural Care USA (N.D.Cal. July 22, 2022, 3:21-CV-00926-WHO) 2022 WL 2905353, at *4–*5, modified on reconsideration (Aug. 31, 2022), 2022 WL 3974258 (holding the retroactivity violated due process).