Skip to main content

Department of Labor Finds That Gig Workers Are Contractors, NOT Employees


Stop me if you have heard this before:  Gig workers have long argued that they are employees, not contractors, and therefore are entitled to the protections afforded under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").  (For those readers that have been following along over the past few years, this argument should not come as much of a surprise.  After all, the Department of Labor has previously been thought to being ready to weigh in on the issue before...as has the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, a UK Court of Appeal, and a New York State Labor Review Board, among others.)

Well on Monday, the Department of Labor issued an opinion letter in which it said that gig workers at an unidentified company were contractors and therefore not employees entitled to the protections afforded under the FLSA.  (This particular company "connects service providers to end-market consumers to provide a wide variety of services, such as transportation, delivery, shopping, moving, cleaning, plumbing, painting, and household services."  The "issue" addressed here is whether the company was correct in classifying these gig workers as independent contractors rather than employees.)

One of the reasons pinpointed by the Department of Labor as to why these gig workers were contractors rather than employees was the fact that these workers had a great deal of control over their own work.  These gig workers were not requited to perform a minimum number of cleaning jobs, were allowed to sign up with other competing companies (or work directly with customers), and allowed these gig workers to ask for higher pay than had previously been set.  Now as some have noted, gig workers that work for Uber, GrubHub, Lyft, etc. have a different working relationship than what was addressed by the Department of Labor in this opinion letter.  (For instance, Uber & Lyft drivers have work rates that are determined by these companies' policies, could risk not being able to drive for Uber or Lyft if a driver rating falls below a certain threshold, etc.)

Now some readers might ask what binding precedential value this Department of Labor opinion letter holds.  I will preface this with a note that the opinion letter is not the be all, end all for either side's argument.  However, while the opinion letter is not binding in a court of law, it serves to add further ammo to the argument of those who seek to classify gig workers as contractors rather than employees.  With a Department of Labor under President Donald Trump that has tended to favor employers in recent years, I would expect similar employer friendly opinion letters going forward (should the Department of Labor delve further into the gig worker contractor v. employee dispute.)


For a copy of the Department of Labor's opinion letter:  https://www.dol.gov/whd/opinion/FLSA/2019/2019_04_29_06_FLSA.pdf
 

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, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more