Be our Friend    

   
Text Size
Login Newsletter Sign-up

Keyword Search HCX for your Favorite Author / Content

Who Is the Employer? Determining Joint-Employer Status

Digg it!Share in FacebookTweet it!
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

co-employment; joint-employmentA Report on Temporary Help, On-Call, Direct-Hire Temporary, Leased, Contract Company, and Independent Contractor Employment in the United States

Besides not defining the term "employee", most statutes fail to spell out who the employer is. There is potential ambiguity on this issue when businesses use temporary agency, leased, or contract workers. Although the primary employer is generally the temporary help, leasing, or contract company, the client may be regarded as a “joint employer” under some laws.

 

The Family and Medical Leave Act, perhaps by virtue of the fact that it is a recent statute, is one of the few laws to explicitly address possible joint employer relationships, such as may exist for leased employees or agency temporaries. While the leasing or temporary help agency is the primary employer, the client company may be required to place the individual in the same or comparable position upon his or her return from FMLA leave.

Additionally, leased and temporary workers will count as employees of the client company for the purposes of determining employment levels for FMLA. Thus, even if the number of regular workers is fewer than 50, an employer may have to provide FMLA benefits to all workers if the number of regular plus temporary and leased employees is 50 or more (Pivec and Massen, 1996).

In recent years, Congress has tried to clear up the ambiguity—and stem abuses—regarding benefits provision to leased employees. Allegedly, businesses were “firing” their non-highly compensated staff and leasing them back through leasing agencies to avoid providing benefits to these employees.

Under section 414(n) in the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, leased and temporary help workers must be counted by the client firm as employees for the purposes of qualifying retirement plans and certain other fringe benefits (such as life insurance and cafeteria plans) if the workers have provided these services “on a substantially full-time basis for at least a year” and the client primarily controls or directs the work of the leased or temporary employees. The rule does not apply to health insurance plans.

Several states have passed legislation clarifying joint employer liability in workers’ compensation cases. New York state has actually ruled that the client is the common law employer of leased employees and is primarily responsible for providing workers’ compensation benefits. However, most states have not clarified joint employer status in workers’ compensation cases, leaving the courts to resolve these issues where there is some dispute.

Court rulings on the issue, in turn, have been inconsistent (Bowker 1997). Similarly, no guidelines have been drawn up clarifying joint employer status under OSHA or other health and safety regulations.

Another area of ambiguity is in the coverage of temporary, leased, and contract workers under the National Labor Relations Act. Several cases pending before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) concern whether workers in these arrangements must be included in collective agreements covering the client’s regular employees. If the NLRB determines that a joint employer relationship exists, both the client and the staffing company may be required to bargain with the employees’ collective bargaining representative (Giddens 1997).

Responding to the ambiguity surrounding joint employer status, the Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations recommended that a standardized definition of employer be adopted. As for the definition of an employee, the Commission recommended that the employer be determined based on the economic realities of the relationship, and not simply on the notion of control. So doing, it asserted, “would remove the incentives that now exist for firms to use variations in corporate form to avoid responsibility for the people who do their work” (Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations, 1996, p. 36)

 

Susan N. Houseman

 

Courtesy of the Department of Labor  orginal article can be found 

http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/herman/reports/futurework/conference/staffing/9.2_jointemployer.htm

Comments:

blog comments powered by Disqus
Author of this article: DOL
More articles :

» Last Year, 54 Million Americans Received Free Preventive Services Thanks to Health Care Reform

Each day, more and more Americans are taking advantage of the new free preventive services provided through the . People of all ages can now get the preventive services they need, like mammograms and the new Annual Wellness Visit, free of...

» My 6 Word Secret Weapon

As an introvert, I often need extra time to process a question and my answer in my head before I speak.  Years ago, I learned a secret trick to buy myself more time.  I would say:“Interesting question, why do you ask?” 

» US Labor Department announces comprehensive final rule on H-2B foreign labor certification program

Rule aims to make jobs more accessible to US workers and strengthen worker protectionsWASHINGTON -- The U.S. Department of Labor's Employment and Training Administration and its Wage and Hour Division today announced a final rule to improve the H-2B...

» Huff Post Exclusive - Workers' Voice, AFL-CIO Super PAC, Relinquishes Control Over $4.1 Million War Chest

WASHINGTON -- In a move described as unprecedented in the history of organized labor, the largest union-affiliated super PAC will relinquish control of its funds, giving union and non-union members the chance to have direct say over its $4.1 million...

» Open letter to the Chief Executive Officer

I need some help this morning. I need to understand what is in your head in today's economic climate. As I understand it your role as CEO is to protect the interests of the stakeholders and the bottom line of the organization. As a result you tell...