Worker Classification: Interns, Employees, and Independent Contractors An important part of complying with labor regulations is accurately identifying the relationship that exists between the company and its workers. In addition to broad federal laws that apply to most companies, businesses are subject to state laws, and sometimes additional laws specific to an industry at either the federal or state level. Classification of employees determines benefits, but also how company resources must be distributed (Hunt, 2015). As litigation involving groups of employees has become more common and the settlement amounts have increased exponentially (Calvasina, Calvasina, & Calvasina, 2010), the consequences of noncompliance, regardless of intent, can cripple businesses of any size. Determinations are not always straightforward and courts at different levels sometimes disagree as to the proper classification of a worker in a particular circumstance.
Unpaid Interns Eric Glatt, Alexander Footman, Kanene Gratts, and Eden Antalik filed an action against Fox Searchlight Pictures, Incorporated (FSP) and its parent company, Fox Entertainment Group, Incorporated (FEG) alleging that they were inaccurately classified as unpaid interns rather than paid employees (Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc., 2013). The District Court granted the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment that Gratts’ action was filed beyond the statute of limitation, found that Glatt and Footman were employees of both
The United States Department of Labor (DOL) has a mission to protect the welfare of wage earners, job seekers, and retirees. They also improve working conditions and ensure work-related benefits and rights. The DOL has many laws and reregulation’s protecting workers that range from the Fair Labor Standards Act, which sets standards for wages and overtime pay, to the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which focuses on workplace safety and health. With the wide range that the DOL has employees can feel that they have standards in place to ensure fair pay, fair treatment, and a safe environment to work in. Without the enforcement of the DOL corporations are left to establish pay and safety standards internally. In a business atmosphere where the importance of profit is often placed before the employees, an environment without laws and regulations can be dangerous. An example can be seen in other countries where labor laws are not in place compassion and common sense also seem to be absent. In these areas workers, many times children often works long hours for little pay. Sadly it has been shown that when corporations are unregulated the importance for the fair treatment of employees takes a less important role.
In 1980, a precedent was set in a Michigan court case involving a man named Charles Toussaint who was suing his employer, BlueCross Blue Shield, for wrongful termination based on the guidelines set in the employee manual (Alfred and Bertsche 33). The manual stated that employees would only be terminated for just cause, and the court decided that Blue Cross had violated the agreements in the employee manual (34). The court also ruled that even with Blue Cross’s efforts to provide a document that “issued non-binding guidelines” the employee manual was a contract and Toussiant was wrongfully terminated (34). After the precedent set by this case many employers and employees for that matter were reviewing their employee manuals for the type of
The legal process within the human resources department tries to format strategies and alliances that avoid negative activities affecting the employers and employees; however, exhibitions using common sense or compassion can conflict with these guidelines creating inappropriate behaviors. If this becomes the case, disciplinary actions begin bringing about other matters of legal issues. Nevertheless, once an individual believes they have been illegally mistreated, they become more apt to submit a lawsuit for purposes of revenge, financial struggles, or inapt employment securities (Alboher, 2012).
Maintaining strong employee relations is vital to the success of any business. Many of the Supreme Court cases in the textbook discuss collective bargaining and union participation. These cases were intriguing because they reiterate employees’ rights to express their opinions and join organizations designed to better their lives.
1. The employee is in a protected class (based on their race, gender, and so forth).
“If an employer wants to limit the risk of being forced to defend an employee class action, entering into individual arbitration agreements with employees is now a strategic option. Moreover, since the series of recent decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated emphatically that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), which applies to most employment relationships, not only favors arbitration over litigation, but also allows the parties to enforce the terms of an arbitration agreement that limits or excludes the use of the class action procedure Killeen (2012),.”
Individuals have been at work for thousands and thousands of years. Over the last century there have been many changes in the United States that protects workers in their positions and the duties they perform. There has been many changes for employers as well that protects companies and organization and offers beneficial information to keep them in compliance with changes and away from any from and form of discrimination. Over the last century there has been the organization of Unions (Bargaining Unit) in which are to protect workers in their positions, give them fair marketable pay and be the liaison between the employer and employee. Union organizations represent employees and negotiate contracts that
A striking decision by the California Labor Commissioner’s Office (Commissioner) in June regarding the classification of a driver for the popular ride service, Uber, could have profound effects on the status of workers in non-traditional employment situations. This result follows other similar demands for employee reclassification, including a class action suit by Yelp review writers asserting that they are actually unpaid employees who are legally entitled to compensation and benefits for their writing services.
Bennett-Alexander, D. & Hartman, L. (2015), Employment law for business (8th ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill Education
Bennett-Alexander, D. D., & Hartman, L. P. (2001). Employment Law for Business (III ed.) Boston, Massachusetts: Mc Graw-Hill Primis.
As many know, worker misclassification occurs when an employer pays an employee as an independent subcontractor with the intention of “getting around” payroll taxes as well as avoiding the need to provide the worker with benefits afforded to “employees” i.e. heath coverage. Contract labor is completely legitimate, of course, but when companies use the classification intentionally in order to obtain an unlawful advantage and to deny the worker the benefits
In order to help companies create a more diverse workforce, laws were put into place, benefiting the employees. Those laws include: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, and many more. These acts not only benefit the employee from being discriminated upon, but also benefit the employer by helping them not come under fire for discriminatory actions, since they would not want to do anything illegal.
The argument comes up that the Protecting the Local Business Opportunity Act (PLBOA) as last proposed in 2015 should be passed by congress and signed into law. We are against this and we as a team are linking with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). This bill amends the National Labor Relations Act to allow two or more employers to be considered joint employers for purposes of the Act only if each employer shares and exercises control over essential terms and conditions of employment and such control over these matters is actual, direct, and immediate. Our first argument is that it is a good business strategy for the parent company to oversee and assume responsibility of all subset operations. Which basically is overseeing the fair labor relations, which results in happy employees and high productivity. Our second argument argues that if a company determines your shifts, pay cap, and working conditions, regardless of if the employee is directly employed by them, then it should be required to assume responsibility of unionization caused by unfair labor practice, which can be directed back to human rights. Finally our third argument the PLBOA undermines the employee’s right to collectively bargain for better working conditions, wages, etc. regarding labor relations. Our
I am a Human Resource (HR) Director of a for-profit company with 500 employees, in this role I will be confronted with many issues. The challenges brought about from technology, globalization, and diversity will impact my role and how legislation will be passed to address these challenges. The next ten years can no doubt bring about legal pitfalls that will impact my organization. Therefore, I will discuss and reflect on the laws I see missing to protect my company from liability and protect my employees from harm. I will also discuss why I think it is important to bring in legal counsel for guidance and when I am confident handling HR issues on my own. In addition, I will highlight the current laws I believe are helping my organization from an employment standpoint. My refection of those areas ultimately leads me to my thoughts on how I plan on addressing what makes me most anxious in this role regarding HR law. Developing a plan to grow my HR law knowledge to minimize my anxiety is the key to my success. By writing this paper I am able to think strategically about all I have learned regarding HR law and how I can use the knowledge in an aspiring role.
In U.S. v. Speedy Gonzalez for example, the OCAHO held that a participant in a business or cooperative is not an employee if he or she holds a substantial ownership interest and exerts control over all or part of a business. To determine whether a worker-shareholder is an owner the courts follow the Supreme Court’s Clackamas decision factors,