SUBSCRIBE BY EMAIL

Your email:

PSC Blog Train

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Congress's latest attempt to curtail use of independent contractors

  
  
  
  
  

Continuing a trend in Congress to limit employers’ use of independent contractors, on April 22, 2010, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (CA) and Senator Sherrod Williams (OH) introduced the Employee Misclassification Prevention Act (H.R. 5107, S. 3254) (“EMPA”) in the House and Senate respectively.

The EMPA would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and render worker misclassifications a violation of federal law. Employers would be required to maintain records reflecting hours worked and wages paid for employees and non-employee workers. They also would be required to provide workers a “notice” that identifies:

  • The worker’s classification
  • A yet to be created, Department of Labor website (containing an on-line complaint link)
  • Contact information for the applicable Department of Labor office
  • Other additional information as prescribed by regulation.

For workers classified as non-employees, the Notice would be required to state:

Your rights to wage, hour, and other labor protections depend upon your proper classification as an employee or non-employee. If you have any questions or concerns about how you have been classified or suspect that you may have been misclassified, contact the U.S. Department of Labor.

Employers who violate the notice and/or record keeping requirements or misclassify a worker would be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,100 per worker for a first offense and up to $5,000 per worker for willful or repeated violations. Employers who misclassify workers and violate the minimum wage and overtime requirements would be subject to treble damages (3X). The proposed legislation also contains broad anti-retaliation/discrimination provisions.

To enforce the Act’s provisions, the Department of Labor would be directed to perform targeted audits focusing on employers in industries that frequently misclassify employees. The Department of Labor and Internal Revenue Service would be permitted to refer incidents of misclassification to each other. The states would be directed to increase their own penalties for worker misclassification, conduct audits for the purpose of identifying employers who misclassify workers, and report the results of the audits to the Department of Labor on a quarterly basis.

While the EMPA is in the earliest stages of consideration by both houses of Congress, its introduction is significant because it follows introduction of the Taxpayer Responsibility, Accountability, and Consistency Act of 2009 (“TRAC”) (H.R. 3408, S. 2882), which would revise the Revenue Act of 1978’s safe harbor provision (the safe harbor provision allows an employer to treat a worker as a contractor if certain requirements are met), make it more difficult for employers to classify workers as independent contractors, and significantly increase employer penalties in the event of misclassification. It also follows President Obama’s proposed budget for 2011, which includes significant funding for the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division to increase the Division’s number of investigators, train investigators to detect misclassification of workers, and focus on industries where misclassification is most prevalent. In sum, the EMPA serves as a reminder that curtailing employers’ use of independent contractors remains a significant issue in Congress. Employers who have not yet done so would be well-advised to review their independent contractor relationships and ensure that they are on the up and up before the Department of Labor and/or a corresponding state agency does it for them.

Comments

We deal with contractors all over the country and I've always been puzzled by why this problem of calling employees - contractors, seems to be so much more prevalent in some states, compared with others? Is it the budgets of local and state authorities who have been investigating this that are less compared with other states? I don't get. You literally know which employers in certain states wouldn't take a chance, while others know that it's standard practice and in some regards, are somewhat forced to, to be competitive. While I hate to see more government growth and oversight, I can see why the enforcement needs to be stronger. I wish I understood why the current differences in oversight are so dramatic.
Posted @ Friday, June 11, 2010 5:45 PM by Mike Burgelin
Mike, 
 
Thanks for your post. While I think the reasons, in our increasingly complex political climate, vary from state to state. I really believe that much of this is revenue generation. I think those states in the deepest financial challenges, NY, CA, etc. Will continue to be the most aggressive in the pursuit of new streams of revenue. 
 
In your experience, you know that the opportunity created for the PEO industry has been partially due to the ambiguity that exists in the different classes of employment. Don't you think that the government's time is better spend, clarifying the employment classes, removing ambiguity versus pursuing, so called, violators? 
 
Posted @ Saturday, June 12, 2010 10:02 PM by Ted Weyn
Hey Ted, 
 
Why revenue driven in one state compared with another though? For example, in Georgia, it seems everyone is sub at least in the construction industry. But Florida, you couldn't get away with that. I should ask my workers' comp group, because you'd think you'd lawsuits regarding claims? I'm not sure what you mean about opportunities for PEOs and the ambuguity of the service but I do agree with your last statement. It's time to have a uniformed policy. 
 
Thanks, 
Mike
Posted @ Monday, June 14, 2010 8:26 PM by Mike
Mike, 
 
Does anyone ever really know the logic of the government? Isn't the term governmental logic an oxymoron?  
You are right, the consistency within the states as to who is being aggressive in pursuing misclassified workers and who is not is unclear. However, I don't see this going away anytime soon. If you can "crack the code" as to the common denominator as to what triggers a state's aggressiveness in pursuit of misclassified employees, please fill us in, readers want to know. 
As to my comment about the "opportunities for PEO's", what I am referring to is that PEO's have been utilized as a "safe harbor" for contract workers and thus has created opportunities for PEOs or Employer or Record Services (EOR). 
The SMB market historically has used PEO's as a form of HR/Payroll outsourcing. However, many of the larger firms have used PEO/EOR’s as an inexpensive form of insurance against misclassification lawsuits. By putting a 3rd party employer or record in place limits or defers their liabilities. Are you seeing an increase in the EOR business? 
Posted @ Tuesday, June 15, 2010 2:39 PM by Ted Weyn
Well, business has been very good this year and I understand what you're saying regarding the EOR. I actually had a long conversation yesterday with a trucking consultant about the issues his industry will be facing and the benefit of the EOR, besides others. Lots of stuff coming that some of these industries will be caught off guard. Have a great day. 
 
Mike
Posted @ Wednesday, June 16, 2010 8:54 AM by Mike Burgelin
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics