About six months ago in Cambridge, Ontario, Sonny Ayres was born, the fifth child of parents Britteney and Chance. But Sonny was no ordinary baby. He weighed 14 1/2 pounds. (Yes, for the benefit of those moms reading this and looking aghast, he was delivered by c-section.)
According to Guinness (the book, not the beer), the heaviest recorded birth was 22 pounds, in 1879 in Seville, Ohio. That baby lived just 11 hours.
A different kind of weighing was at issue in a recent decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, determining independent contractor status.
The issue was whether three plaintiffs who owned Pepperidge Farm distribution routes should have been considered employees under Pennsylvania’s wage and hour laws. The district court granted summary judgment for Pepperidge Farm, ruling that they were not employees, and the drivers appealed.
The drivers argued that the court should not have granted summary judgment because the job of weighing the evidence is supposed to be left to the jury. But, as the Third Circuit explained, it is the judge’s role to weigh the relevant legal factors. The judge can apply the undisputed facts to the relevant legal factors and can make a legal determination whether each factor supports employment or independent contractor status. And that’s exactly what the Third Circuit did here.
Applying a ten-factor Right to Control Test, the court determined that 8 of 10 factors supported independent contractor status, and so the plaintiffs were properly classified as contractors, not employees.
The plaintiffs argued that Pepperidge Farm set parameters and expectations for the distribution routes, thereby exerting control. The Third Circuit, however, explained that setting parameters and expectations is consistent with either independent contractor or employee status. The control factor tilts toward employee status when the hiring party sets parameters and expectations and directs the time, place, and manner of performance.
In this case, the right-to-control factors supported independent contractor status because the drivers determined the time, place, and manner for performing deliveries. The drivers bought and sold routes, organized their own distribution businesses, hired their own employees, set their own hours, and made deliveries when and how they chose.
This case is a good reminder of what type of control is relevant in the right-to-control analysis and what type of control is not. Some control is exerted over every relationship, whether it’s independent contractor or employment. The trick is knowing which type of control can be exerted without tipping the scales.
Pepperidge Farm prevailed in this case because it did not reserve or exercise the kind of control that supports employee status. And for that, we say Weigh to Go!
© 2024 Todd Lebowitz, posted on WhoIsMyEmployee.com, Exploring Issues of Independent Contractor Misclassification and Joint Employment. All rights reserved.
