Continuing Uncertainty for Employers Seeking to Navigate Joint Employment Liability
Employers increasingly rely on independent contractors, "temps" and other nontraditional workers to solve their business needs. These nontraditional work…
November 14, 2017 at 12:45 PM
7 minute read
Employers increasingly rely on independent contractors, “temps” and other nontraditional workers to solve their business needs. These nontraditional work arrangements can raise a variety of complex legal issues related to joint employment liability, including but not limited to potential employment and labor law claims against the entity utilizing the nontraditional workers. Liability as a joint employer is governed by an increasingly disparate number of factors for determining “employee status” under various federal and state statutes, and regulatory schemes. Employers are left struggling to navigate the expansive and shifting regulatory, judicial and legislative definitions that determine joint employment liability. This article endeavors to help employers and employment law practitioners understand joint employment liability through a discussion of these new and developing legal standards.
The federal government continues its quest to narrow the parameters for joint employment liability. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) recently rescinded Obama-era guidance that greatly expanded the scope of joint employment. See https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/opa/opa20170607. The first administrative interpretation (AI) that was rescinded addressed the classification of independent contractors as employees under the FLSA. The DOL essentially created a presumption of employment for all workers under the FLSA, stating “most workers are employees under the FLSA's broad definitions.” see administrator's interpretation No. 2015-1 (July 2015). The second AI that was rescinded established new standards for determining joint employment under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA). The DOL took the position that “the concept of joint employment, like employment generally, should be defined expansively under the FLSA and MSPA.”
While the two withdrawn wage and hour AIs were not binding law, they demonstrated a significant shift in wage and hour law advocated by the prior administration, and served as the DOL's justification for its enforcement actions. The rescission of these two AIs was the Trump administrations' first step in clarifying its position on joint employment issues.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: For Big Law Names, Shorter is Sweeter
- 2Wine, Dine and Grind (Through the Weekend): Summer Associates Thirst For Experience in 'Real Matters'
- 3The 'Biden Effect' on Senior Attorneys: Should I Stay or Should I Go?
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5First Lawsuit Filed Alleging Contraceptive Depo-Provera Caused Brain Tumor
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250