Skip to main content

NLRB Returns to Long Standing Independent Contractor Standard That Gives Signifcant Weight to "Entrepreneurial Opportunity"


At the end of last month, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") issued a much anticipated decision in SuperShuttle DFW, Inc. in which the NLRB reverted to its long standing independent contractor standard, favoring the traditional common law standard.  (The common law standard is derived from the 1958 version of the Restatement of Agency, a treatise that provides ten non-exhaustive factors for determining whether a worker is an independent contractor or employee.  These ten factors include the level of control a business exerts over a worker, the method of payment, and the amount of supervision of the worker, among other factors).  The decision in SuperShuttle DFW, Inc. overruled a President Barack Obama era 2014 NLRB decision in FedEx Home Delivery in which the NLRB had severely modified the applicable test for determining independent contractor status by limiting the significance of a worker's entrepreneurial opportunity for economic gain.

In this particular case, the dispute centered around shuttle/van drivers of SuperShuttle at the Dallas Fort Worth Airport and whether they were independent contractors or employees.  In the 3 - 1 decision, the NLRB noted that the workers leased or owned their work vans and had nearly unfettered control over their daily work schedules and work conditions.  These working conditions provided the workers with significant opportunity for economic gain.  Coupling these factors along with the fact that there was an absence of supervision over the workers (and a mutual understanding that the workers were independent contractors), led the NLRB to find that the workers were not employees under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA").  (Under the NLRA, only employees are covered whereas independent contractors are not.  Readers will recall that the NLRA provides employees the right to unionize and engage in collective bargaining).

The sole NLRB Member that dissented was Lauren McFerran who wrote that the three member majority in this decision had no evidence to support the contention that entrepreneurial opportunity was at the center of the common law test for agency.  However, it is worth noting that the 3 - 1 majority decision in this case puts the NLRB in line with a 2017 decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit which had overruled the NLRB's FedEx Home Delivery case.  In the Circuit Court's opinion, the Court found that the delivery drivers were independent contractors.


For a copy of the NLRB's decision:  apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4582a96a9c

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more