Employee or Independent Contractor? The Law Isn't Always So Sure
The gig economy could transform the way companies do business, but it's being hampered by the confusing distinction between employees and independent contractors.
March 01, 2019 at 02:40 PM
3 minute read
Lawyers looking to advise clients dabbling in the gig economy may have their work cut out for them, according to the “Succeeding in the Gig Economy” panel held on Friday at the ABA Tech Show.
According to some Federal Reserve statistics referenced during the presentation, 31 percent of working adults participate in the gig economy for an average of five hours per month.
Employers are happy because it means lower overhead and employees like the flexibility associated with being able to decide when and where they work—but those arrangements can still present all kind of legal complications.
“If you're treating your workers like employees, that's going to be an issue,” said Emily Wajert, an employment associate at Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel.
If that's the case, then how do you delineate an employee from an independent contractor? The answer differs from state to state and leaves plenty of room for interpretation.
Wajert and Basha Rubin, co-founder and CEO of Priori, laid out two of the more common approaches. The Economic Realities Test has been utilized by entities like the Department of Labor and by states like Pennsylvania. It looks closely at the nature of the work being performed filtered through the tenants of integrality, managerial skill, relative investment, permanence of relationship and degree of control.
The ABC Test, on the other hand, has been the source of great contention for companies reliant upon the services of independent contractors in California. It assumes that anyone is an employee if their work is a central part of the core business.
“It's more difficult for employers who want to categorize their workers as independent contractors to meet,” Wajert said.
However, there are things that attorneys can advise their clients to do to help make the distinction between employee and independent contractor less ambiguous. Job training, for example, should be administered separately between the two groups.
Previously employers may have avoided training non-employees altogether, but Wajert advised against this since companies can still be held accountable for the actions of their independent contractors.
Drafting the same employment contracts to use for employees and gig economy workers is also inadvisable. “You really need to have those distinctions. It's really important.” Wajert said.
Rubin pointed to the potential of the gig economy with regards to the legal industry, citing a CLIO study that shows small law firms achieving an average of 2.4 billable hours per day. The rest of their time is devoted to administrative work or marketing and collections.
Being able to farm some of that work out to independent contractors could free time for more lucrative activities. “That kind of model I think will increasingly touch lots of clients and industries,” Rubin said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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