Are Homeless Hotspots Entitled To Minimum Wage?

Wireless Internet SignIf you are a fellow tech junkie, you may already have heard about the flap over a marketer's use of homeless people as Internet hotspots at the South by Southwest (SXSW) Interactive technology conference in Austin, Texas.

According to the New York Times, BBH Labs, a unit of international marketing agency BBH, recruited 13 people from a local homeless shelter to serve as human 4G wireless hotspots at the conference as part of its Homeless Hotspots project. The "volunteers" were provided with mobile wi-fi devices, business cards and personalized t-shirts stating "I'm [Name], a 4G Hotspot." They were directed to go to crowded areas of the conference, where conference attendees could use the wireless hotspot service in exchange for donations. The project participants were paid $20 for the day, and were allowed to keep any donations received in exchange for the wireless service. 

Leaving aside the debate about whether this project is blatant exploitation or a brilliant effort to bring the problem of homelessness into the public eye (or both),* many have questioned whether BBH violated the FLSA by only paying its program participants $20 per day instead of the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. So, did it?

Continue Reading

Louisiana Joins the DOL's Misclassification Initiative

signing.memo.XSmall.jpgLouisiana is the latest State to sign a Memorandum of Understanding and join forces with the U.S. Department of Labor to combat employee misclassification.  These Memorandums of Understanding with state government agencies arose as part of the U.S. Department of Labor's Misclassification Initiative, with the goal of preventing, detecting and remedying employee misclassification. Louisiana is now the thirteenth State to sign one of these Memorandums after California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Utah and Washington.  The Memorandums allow the DOL to share information and to coordinate efforts with participating states as part of its Misclassification Initiative.

As we have previously mentioned, the DOL is laser focused on employers who misclassify employees as independent contractors.  And as misclassification continues to grow, so does the DOL’s resolve.  In 2011, the Wage and Hour Division collected more than $5 million in back wages for minimum wage and overtime violations under the FLSA that resulted from employees being misclassified as independent contractors or otherwise not properly treated as employees.  With that kind of money being collected, this issue is not going away any time soon.

Insight for Employers

Whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee is a very fact specific analysis.   Like other misclassification issues, when left unchecked, failure to properly classify a worker as an employee may lead to serious monetary damages down the road.  Even if you are familiar with these rules, if your business uses independent contractors, it may be worth a few minutes of your time to confirm with an experienced employment attorney that your workers are properly classified. 

Wage & Hour Issues in the Cleaning and Maintenance Industry

janitorial - maid cart.jpgCheck out my article in the October 2011 issue of Cleaning & Maintenance Management.  While focused on the cleaning and maintenance industry, the issues highlighted in the article are generally applicable to a wide range employers. 

Here's the link: Are You Due for a Wage and Hour Checkup?

The U.S. Department of Labor has specifically identified the janitorial industry as a target for enforcement actions, so employers in the industry are strongly advised to assess their vulnerability to wage and hour claims before the investigator or process server comes knocking. 

 

Court: Cable Installers Employees, Not Independent Contractors

TV cablesA couple of weeks ago, I wrote about an initiative by the U.S. Department of Labor, IRS and various state agencies to launch a coordinated crack-down on employers who misclassify employees as independent contractors. Recently, a U.S. District Court in Ohio issued a ruling that nicely illustrates the problem of misclassifcation and the potential liabilities that employers can face as a result. Solis v Cascom, Inc - .pdf

In 2009, the U.S. Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against Cascom, Inc., a business that contracted with Time-Warner Cable to install residential cable services in Southwestern Ohio. Cascom's installation work was performed by cable installers, whom the company classified as independent contractors. The installers were paid by the job rather than by the hour, and did not receive overtime pay. The DOL alleged that the workers were in fact employees, and that Cascom violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay required overtime and failing to maintain records of the installers' hours. 

Continue Reading

DOL Coordinates With IRS, States On Independent Contractor Misclassification

Audit stampEarlier this week, the U.S. Department of Labor held a ceremony at which Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis signed a memorandum of understanding with the Internal Revenue Service to "improve departmental efforts to end the business practice of misclassifying employees in order to avoid providing employment protections." The DOL also signed or has agreed to sign memorandums of understanding with officials in 11 states to coordinate efforts to crack down on independent contractor misclassification, including Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New York, Utah, and Washington. 

Although misclassifying workers as independent contractors can result in violations of numerous laws, including the tax code and wage and hour laws, the various government agencies charged with enforcing those laws have historically not shared information or coordinated their enforcement efforts. That now now appears to be coming to an end, as the DOL becomes more aggressive in its enforcement efforts and state and federal governments look for opportunities to enhance their revenues.

At the same time, the IRS has announced a new "Voluntary Classification Settlement Program" to encourage employers who have misclassified workers in the past to "get into compliance by making a minimal payment covering past payroll tax obligations rather than waiting for an IRS audit." To be eligible for this program, applicant employers must (1) consistently have treated the workers as nonemployes, (2) have filed all required 1099s for the workers for the prior three years, and (3) not currently be under audit by the IRS, DOL, or a state agency concerning the classification of the affected workers. Employers accepted into the program will be required to pay an amount "effectively equaling just over one percent of the wages paid to the reclassified workers for the past year." No penalties or interest wll be assessed, but for the first three years under the program, the employers must agree to an extended statute of limitations for the IRS to pursue payroll tax violations. Unfortunately for employers, the IRS program would not provide any amnesty for violations of other laws, such as state or federal overtime laws or state tax violations. The IRS announcement also makes no mention of whether the agency will shre information from the settlement program with the Department of Labor or other agencies. 

Because misclassification violations implicate a wide range of laws and frequently involve multiple workers, they can represent a significant liability for employers, particularly for small and midsize businesses without significant financial reserves to defend or settle these claims. Given the risks and the spotlight that the DOL is shining on this issue, businesses that use independent contractors should act now to ensure that their workers are properly classified. Among other things, this means making sure that when you classify a worker as an "independent contractor," you are prepared to prove that your classification decision is warranted under all of the relevant laws, including but not limited to the Fair Labor Standards Act, state wage and hour laws, workers' compensation statutes, and the state and federal tax codes. Unless you are well-versed in these laws, this is yet another area where a few hours of consultation with an experienced employment lawyer now may help avoid serious liability down the road.

 

Security Guards Misclassified As Independent Contractors

iStock_000015878345XSmall.jpgOn May 24, 2011, a federal district court in Chicago ruled that security guards who were licensed, insured, trained, and paid by the hour by a private security company were not independent contractors, but employees entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Solis v. International Detective & Protective Service, Ltd. 

Granting summary judgment for the Department of Labor, U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall found that the security guards were owed a total of $101,577.60 in unpaid overtime, plus the same amount in liquidated damages. 

While the case does not break much new legal ground, it does offer some useful reminders about what not to do if you want your workers to be treated as independent contractors. To borrow a form from a certain well-known comedian:

Your security guards might be employees (not independent contractors) if:

  1. You provide them with a list of "Policies and Procedures," a memo instructing them on who to notify in the event of emergency, the order of patrols, what to include in written reports, and how to properly check their equipment, and similar directions on how to perform their jobs.
  2. You organize your guards in a "chain of command" with titles similar to those of a police organization (officer, sergeant, lieutenant, etc.) 
  3. You provide key equipment like badges, mobile phones, cameras, vehicles with your company logo, and reimburse them for gas and expenses. 
  4. Instead of requiring them to obtain their own security guard licenses and firearm authorization cards, you arrange for them to be licensed as employees of your firm. 
  5. You pay them an hourly wage and reimburse their expenses, with no opportunity for them to share in the profit or loss of the business. 
  6.  You employ the guards on an ongoing, at-will basis. 
  7. You operate a security firm - meaning that security guards are obviously an integral part of your business.

The bottom line is that if you treat your "independent contractors" as employees for all but payroll purposes, the last laugh will belong to the plaintiffs' lawyers who gleefully sue you for unpaid overtime.