Menu

Showing 8 posts in Independent Contractor v. Employee.

California Labor Commissioner Delivers a blow to the ride Sharing Independent Contractor Concept

The decision to classify workers as independent contractors versus employees can be a costly one, but nevertheless, continues to be a decision many employers make quickly and without regard for the potential risks. In California, the risks are significant, given the extensive Labor Code protections afforded to employees, and the resulting penalties. More ›

Eighth Circuit: Doctor Is Unable to Maintain Employment Claims due to Determination of Independent Contractor Status

From 1991 until 2011, Larry Alexander worked as a pathologist for Avera St. Luke's Hospital in South Dakota. Under the terms of his contract, Alexander was an independent contractor free from control of Avera. Alexander paid his own taxes, maintained his own malpractice insurance and paid for his own professional licenses. Avera required him to have medical privileges at its facility, billed patients on his behalf, and paid Alexander in equal monthly payments for his services. More ›

Compliance: Making sense of the myriad tests for independent contractor v. employment status

The question of whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor can have very important consequences, as the two categories receive very different treatment under the law.

To name only a few differences, there are no federal or state income tax withholding obligations for independent contractors; wage and hour laws do not apply to independent contractors; most anti-discrimination laws do not apply to independent contractors. And, of course, the employer mandate under the Affordable Care Act does not apply in the case of independent contractors. There is a lot riding on the question. More ›

Strippers’ Suit Alleges they are Employees, not Independent Contractors

In a purported class action, Jessica Mason et al. v. Fantasy LLC et al., five adult dancers have sued the Fantasy Gentlemen’s Club in Colorado federal court for misclassifying them as independent contractors, alleging they were in fact employees. The dancers claim that, as employees, they were entitled to back wages, overtime, and other benefits.

Plaintiffs allege that they were paid no wages, but were in fact required to pay for the right to dance at the club. As employees, they allege, they were entitled to wages, overtime, and to retain the totality of their tips, among other things.

The Complaint states that dancers were forced to comply with various rules of the establishment, or else pay fines. More ›

District Manager Correctly Classified as Independent Contractor … not an Employee

Barger & Wolen Secures Appellate Ruling

Insurance District Manager Correctly Classified as an Independent Contractor … Not an Employee

By Royal F. Oakes and Michael A.S. Newman

The California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District (Division Three) recently issued its ruling in Beaumont-Jacques v. Farmers Group, Inc., et al., affirming the trial court’s determination on summary judgment that Appellant Erin Beaumont-Jacques, a former District Manager for five affiliated insurers (“Farmers”) was an independent contractor, not an employee. The case has been certified for publication.

The authors of this article represented Farmers in this case both at the trial court and the appellate level. More ›

Crowdsourced Workers: Are they Employees or Independent Contractors?

What happens when modern innovations in the workforce (made possible by the advent of the internet) collide with traditional concepts of employment?  You get lawsuits like Christopher Otey v. Crowdflower, Inc., filed late last year in the Northern District of California. More ›

Who is an employee and who is an independent contractor under the employer mandate provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare)?

As we have written in this space in the past, whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor can have many consequences.  The classification can determine whether the principal is liable for the negligent acts of the worker, whether the worker may sue for wrongful termination or discrimination, is entitled to workers’ compensation insurance, is subject to tax treatment as an employee, and a lot more.

Now, the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) has added still more consequences.  Among other things, as reported in the Wall Street Journal, the Affordable Care Act requires firms with 50 or more “full-time equivalent workers” to offer health plans to employees who work the requisite number of hours per week, or else pay a $2,000 penalty for each uncovered worker beyond 30 employees. The Wall Street Journal reports that many businesses have been moving full-time employees to part-time positions in an effort to avoid the mandate. More ›

Exotic Dancers are Employees, not Independent Contractors, Kansas Supreme Court Rules

In Milano’s v. Kansas Department of Labor, the Kansas Supreme Court determined that exotic dancers were employees, not independent contractors, for purposes of unemployment insurance.

Milano’s had purchased the club in 2002. In 2004, Milano’s began treating the exotic dancers as independent contractors, rather than employees. The Supreme Court, affirming the rulings of the Court of Appeal, the trial court and Kansas Department of Labor, found that the dancers were, in fact, employees under Kansas law. More ›

Search
Subscribe via Email