Scheduling
Time & Attendance
Forecasting
Employee App
Payroll Integrations
Communications
Staffing Management
By Jon Hyman
Sep. 8, 2014
In Alexander v. FedEx Ground Package Sys. (8/27/14), the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that FedEx’s delivery drivers are employees of the company, not independent contractors.
The opinion’s introductory two paragraphs pretty much sum up the entire case:
As a central part of its business, FedEx contracts with drivers to deliver packages to its customers. The drivers must wear FedEx uniforms, drive FedEx-approved vehicles, and groom themselves according to FedEx’s appearance standards. FedEx tells its drivers what packages to deliver, on what days, and at what times. Although drivers may operate multiple delivery routes and hire third parties to help perform their work, they may do so only with FedEx’s consent.
FedEx contends its drivers are independent contractors under California law. Plaintiffs, a class of FedEx drivers in California, contend they are employees. We agree with plaintiffs.
Abraham Lincoln reportedly asked, “If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” His answer was, “Four. Calling a dog’s tail a leg does not make it a leg.” … Bottom line? Labeling the drivers “independent contractors” in FedEx’s Operating Agreement does not conclusively make them so.… [O]ur decision substantially unravels FedEx’s business model.…
This case also confirms that if you exercise any control over how workers perform services for you, it is likely that they should be classified as employees, not independent contractors. This distinction is important, because, unlike contractors, employee are subject to a host of employment laws, including the anti-discrimination laws, workers’ comp laws, and wage-and-hour (minimum wage and overtime) laws.
While this case only covers employers governed by California law in the 9th Circuit, I would expect the filing of copycat lawsuits under the laws of different states in different courts. In other words, this case is not the final word on this issue. Thus, to answer the specific question I posed in the title to this post, while this case does not necessarily spell the end of the independent contractor, it very well could be the beginning of trend of cases leading down this path.
Come see what we’re building in the world of predictive employee scheduling, superior labor insights and next-gen employee apps. We’re on a mission to automate workforce management for hourly employees and bring productivity, optimization and engagement to the frontline.
Staffing Management
Managing employee time-off requests: A guide for business ownersSummary Vacation, sick time, PTO banks, and unpaid leave are only a few forms of employee time off — Mo...
Staffing Management
4 proven steps for tackling employee absenteeismSummary Identifying the cause of employee absenteeism not only helps uncover deeper-rooted issues — Mor...
absence management, Employee scheduling software, predictive scheduling, shift bid, shift swapping
Staffing Management
Employee or contractor? 6 worker misclassification FAQsMisclassification of employees as independent contractors led to overtime violations, according to a La...
compliance, Department of Labor, employee engagement, FLSA, HR technology, Worker misclassification