Author: Richard Reibstein Esq.

The New York Court of Appeals today issued a decision involving the independent contractor status of a Postmates courier.  The Court’s opinion supporting employee status may have very little impact from a judicial standpoint in New York and, indeed, may provide useful insights for savvy companies seeking to elevate their level of independent contractor compliance.  But it may also send shockwaves through the gig economy in New York and elsewhere for those who read more into the decision than is warranted.

The Senate passed last night an 883-page Coronavirus stimulus bill, which is expected to be passed by the House and signed into law by the end of this week.  It contains unemployment assistance provisions that expand coverage to individuals not ordinarily covered by unemployment insurance laws:  self-employed individuals, also known as independent contractors, freelancers, sole proprietors, or gig workers.  Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act, such individuals will be entitled to “pandemic unemployment assistance” if they are able and willing to work or telework for pay, but are unable to do so due to a broad range of reasons related to the COVID-19 pandemic.  In addition, Congress recently passed and the President signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, which also covered independent contractors, providing for paid sick and paid family leave to self-employed individuals.

This post was inadvertently republished on March 18, 2020.  It was originally posted on December 17, 2019, found at this link.

This past month was the first month we can recall where there were no legal developments of note involving class action independent contractor misclassification lawsuits, which have become increasingly prevalent.  Instead, the two top cases reported below are decisions by federal appellate courts in single plaintiff IC misclassification lawsuits: one where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that sales marketers for roofing companies had been misclassified under a Pennsylvania wage payment law, and the other where the Fifth Circuit held that a highly paid legal consultant seeking overtime pay under the federal wage and hour law had been properly classified as an IC.

Many companies that operate their businesses on an independent contractor model or supplement their workforce with ICs may be wondering if they will be impacted by the U.S. Department of Labor’s final rule on joint employer status, which was informally released today.  They are likely asking, “Does this final rule have any bearing on independent contractors?”  The answer is yes.

Our combined news update provides guidance for companies that utilize independent contractors on what not to do.  The first lesson involves a company’s waiver of its best argument for compelling arbitration of an IC...

Ten years ago, when we began a legal blog dedicated to independent contractor compliance and misclassification, the landscape of the law involving ICs was quite different than today – although a great deal remains unchanged.  We...

“Independent contractor misclassification” is a phrase that is misunderstood, misapplied, and misused – constantly. It is used to cover an array of disparate forms of IC misclassification: unpardonable; uninformed; unprepared; unintentional; and unjust. [1]

Last month saw large settlements and yet another new lawsuit against companies that have an independent contractor business model, but also success by such companies in obtaining a favorable jury verdict in an IC...