Employee or Independent Contractor? How the Effects of Classifications Impact Employer Liability

Mary Anne Mellow, Timothy Niedbalski, Jeff S. Wehmer
{"title":"Employee or Independent Contractor? How the Effects of Classifications Impact Employer Liability","authors":"Mary Anne Mellow, Timothy Niedbalski, Jeff S. Wehmer","doi":"10.12690/0895-0016-83.1.45","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"RECENTLY, awareness has begun to grow about the reclassification of workers as employees or independent contracts across all industries. (1) This heightened awareness is the result of increased enforcement actions and challenges by various governmental entities to the classification of workers as contractors. (2) For example, federal \"worker misclassification\" legislation has been proposed, (3) and the Internal Revenue Service has launched an initiative focusing on more aggressive audits of companies. (4) Classifying workers as employees or independent contractors can be extremely complex and vital to your case. The stakes are extremely high because consequences can be staggering. (5) A number of states have also increased enforcement. In California, the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach implemented mandatory \"concession agreements\" for drayage trucking services at both ports. (6) The Port of Los Angeles provision required motor carriers providing drayage services to transition from using independent contractors to using 100-percent employees within a five-year period, beginning with \"at least a 20% transition\" to employees by the end of the fourth quarter of 2009. (7) In Maryland, the legislature enacted a Workplace Fraud Act in 2009 effectively creating a presumption that all workers are employees. (8) That Act authorized significant potential penalties to be imposed against businesses for \"knowing failure\" to properly classify individuals as employees. (9) The importance of these issues also extends to civil litigation. (10) The long established doctrine of respondent superior or imputed negligence provides employers can be held vicariously liable in tort law for the negligence of their employees under various circumstances. (11) The doctrine is premised on the notion one who is in a position to exercise control over the performance of a service must exercise it or bear the loss. (12) An employee is usually regarded as a member of the employer's staff and subject to the control of the employer. (13) The employee's tortious acts committed within the course and the scope of his employment resulting in liability are, therefore, imputed to the employer due to the working relationship existing between the parties. (14) Generally, a business that contracts with an independent contractor is immune from vicarious liability for damages to a third party for the negligent acts of the contractor committed during the performance of the agreement. (15) An independent contractor is commonly defined as one who contracts to perform a certain task or duty independently according to their own means and methods without being subject to the control of the hiring party except as to the ultimate goal or result. (16) Historically in circumstances where this level of independence existed, the imposition of liability on the hiring entity who only exercised limited control over the method in which the contracted work was performed resulted in inequity. (17) As stated in Prosser on Torts, the work is to be \"regarded as the contractor's own enterprise, and he, rather than the employer, is the proper party to be charged with the responsibility for preventing the risk, and administering and distributing against it.\" (18) Therefore, the distinction between an \"employee\" and an \"independent contractor\" can become a critical liability issue to the hiring entity. (19) This article will discuss the distinction between employees, independent contractors, and borrowed servants for the purpose of imputing tort liability to employers. Specifically, it will focus on the distinction between these classifications under the purview of two representative states that border one another--Missouri and Illinois. In this context, we provide a series of similar automobile collision cases from Missouri and Illinois depicting common employee-independent contractor situations. As this article shows, similar facts and circumstances associated with the employee-employer relationship may lead to surprisingly different outcomes. …","PeriodicalId":81080,"journal":{"name":"Defense counsel journal","volume":"83 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Defense counsel journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12690/0895-0016-83.1.45","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

RECENTLY, awareness has begun to grow about the reclassification of workers as employees or independent contracts across all industries. (1) This heightened awareness is the result of increased enforcement actions and challenges by various governmental entities to the classification of workers as contractors. (2) For example, federal "worker misclassification" legislation has been proposed, (3) and the Internal Revenue Service has launched an initiative focusing on more aggressive audits of companies. (4) Classifying workers as employees or independent contractors can be extremely complex and vital to your case. The stakes are extremely high because consequences can be staggering. (5) A number of states have also increased enforcement. In California, the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach implemented mandatory "concession agreements" for drayage trucking services at both ports. (6) The Port of Los Angeles provision required motor carriers providing drayage services to transition from using independent contractors to using 100-percent employees within a five-year period, beginning with "at least a 20% transition" to employees by the end of the fourth quarter of 2009. (7) In Maryland, the legislature enacted a Workplace Fraud Act in 2009 effectively creating a presumption that all workers are employees. (8) That Act authorized significant potential penalties to be imposed against businesses for "knowing failure" to properly classify individuals as employees. (9) The importance of these issues also extends to civil litigation. (10) The long established doctrine of respondent superior or imputed negligence provides employers can be held vicariously liable in tort law for the negligence of their employees under various circumstances. (11) The doctrine is premised on the notion one who is in a position to exercise control over the performance of a service must exercise it or bear the loss. (12) An employee is usually regarded as a member of the employer's staff and subject to the control of the employer. (13) The employee's tortious acts committed within the course and the scope of his employment resulting in liability are, therefore, imputed to the employer due to the working relationship existing between the parties. (14) Generally, a business that contracts with an independent contractor is immune from vicarious liability for damages to a third party for the negligent acts of the contractor committed during the performance of the agreement. (15) An independent contractor is commonly defined as one who contracts to perform a certain task or duty independently according to their own means and methods without being subject to the control of the hiring party except as to the ultimate goal or result. (16) Historically in circumstances where this level of independence existed, the imposition of liability on the hiring entity who only exercised limited control over the method in which the contracted work was performed resulted in inequity. (17) As stated in Prosser on Torts, the work is to be "regarded as the contractor's own enterprise, and he, rather than the employer, is the proper party to be charged with the responsibility for preventing the risk, and administering and distributing against it." (18) Therefore, the distinction between an "employee" and an "independent contractor" can become a critical liability issue to the hiring entity. (19) This article will discuss the distinction between employees, independent contractors, and borrowed servants for the purpose of imputing tort liability to employers. Specifically, it will focus on the distinction between these classifications under the purview of two representative states that border one another--Missouri and Illinois. In this context, we provide a series of similar automobile collision cases from Missouri and Illinois depicting common employee-independent contractor situations. As this article shows, similar facts and circumstances associated with the employee-employer relationship may lead to surprisingly different outcomes. …
雇员还是独立承包商?分类如何影响雇主责任
最近,人们开始意识到,所有行业都将工人重新分类为雇员或独立合同。(1)这种意识的提高是执法行动的增加和各种政府实体对工人作为承包商分类的挑战的结果。(2)例如,联邦“工人错误分类”立法已经提出,(3)美国国税局(Internal Revenue Service)发起了一项倡议,重点是对公司进行更积极的审计。(4)将工人分类为雇员或独立承包商可能是极其复杂的,对你的案件至关重要。赌注非常高,因为后果可能是惊人的。一些州也加强了执法力度。在加州,洛杉矶港和长滩港对两个港口的拖运卡车服务实施了强制性的“特许协议”。(6)洛杉矶港的规定要求提供排水服务的汽车运输公司在五年内从使用独立承包商过渡到使用100%的员工,从2009年第四季度末“至少20%的过渡”到员工。(7)在马里兰州,立法机构于2009年颁布了《工作场所欺诈法》,有效地创造了一种假设,即所有工人都是雇员。(8)该法案授权对那些“明知未能”正确地将个人归类为雇员的企业处以可能的重大处罚。这些问题的重要性也延伸到民事诉讼。(10)长期确立的被告上级过失或归责过失原则规定,在各种情况下,雇主可以在侵权法中为其雇员的过失承担替代责任。(11)这一学说的前提是,有能力对服务的履行行使控制权的人必须行使控制权,否则就要承担损失。(12)雇员通常被视为雇主的职员,受雇主的控制。(十三)雇员在工作过程中实施的侵权行为及其受雇范围导致的侵权责任,根据双方存在的工作关系,归责于雇主。(14)一般而言,与独立承包商订立合同的企业免于因承包商在履行协议期间的过失行为而对第三方造成损害的替代责任。(15)独立承包人通常被定义为:除最终目的或结果外,不受发包方控制,按照自己的手段和方法独立履行某项任务或职责的人。(16)从历史上看,在存在这种程度的独立性的情况下,把责任强加给只对执行承包工作的方法行使有限控制的雇用实体,造成不公平。(17)正如《普罗塞论侵权》(Prosser on tort)所述,这项工作应“被视为承包商自己的事业,他而不是雇主,是负有预防风险、管理和分配风险责任的适当一方”。(18)因此,区分“雇员”和“独立承包商”可能成为雇用实体的一个关键责任问题。(19)为了将侵权责任归责给雇主,本文将讨论雇员、独立承包人和借用的仆人之间的区别。具体来说,它将侧重于在两个相互接壤的代表性州——密苏里州和伊利诺伊州——的范围内区分这些分类。在这种情况下,我们提供了密苏里州和伊利诺伊州的一系列类似的汽车碰撞案例,描述了常见的雇员独立承包商的情况。正如这篇文章所显示的,与雇员-雇主关系相关的类似事实和情况可能会导致令人惊讶的不同结果。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书