Tag Archives: misclassification

Are You Misclassifying Your Workers and Committing A Fraud?

Today’s post comes from guest author Leonard Jernigan, from The Jernigan Law Firm.

To avoid misclassifying your workers follow these tips:

  • Don’t make assumptions. If you are a business owner you should consult a tax professional and an attorney to ensure you are complying with IRS and labor laws when hiring staff or contractors.
  • If contracting with staffing companies or labor brokers, make sure those agencies are properly classifying its workers as employees. Companies can be held responsible for labor violations of their contractors.
  • Consider filing a SS-8 Form (Determination of Worker Status) with the IRS and ask that agency to determine whether the worker is an employee or independent contractor.
  • Be aware that contractors set their own schedules and pricing, and perform the work as they see fit. If you want control over these areas, make sure you hire an employee.
  • Check the workers’ compensation policies of any subcontractor you hire. (Look out for “ghost policies,” which aren’t designed to cover known employees.)
  • Don’t rely on excuses such as “He only works a few days a week.” “She agreed to be an independent contractor.” “They use their own tools.” “He’s done this for so long he doesn’t need my supervision.”

Thanks to McClatchy DC!

 

Legislative Changes To Workers’ Compensation – Wisconsin and National

As we in Wisconsin wrestle with Governor Walker’s ill-advised proposal to split up an efficient and time-honored workers’ compensation system (for alleged purposes of “efficiency”), it is instructive to reflect on the legislative proposals during the first quarter of 2015 across the nation in workers’ compensation. 

A National Council on Compensation Insurance, Inc. (NCCI) annual issue symposium in Florida reported that over 600 workers’ compensation bills were filed in the first quarter of 2015. Over 10% of these (65) deal with presumptive coverage for First Responders, giving First Responders the presumption of workers’ compensation coverage for their injuries and occupational exposures. (This is a topic that has come up a lot since the September 11 attacks, bolstered by other tragic news such as the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting).

The next most popular type of bills filed during the first quarter of 2015 included bills revising the definition of an employee (37 bills), occupational diseases (36 bills), reimbursement and fee schedules (33 bills) and indemnity benefits (32 bills).

The definition of employee versus Independent Contractor or subcontractor has been a popular issue regarding lawsuits such as Uber Technologies and Lyft, Inc. and the self-storage and moving marketplace eMove, Inc. Interestingly, on the issue of benefits (and attorney fees that apply to those benefits) “If you increase attorney fees you are likely to increase attorney involvement,” aid Lori Lovgren NCCI Division Executive of State Relations . However, she also noted: but “injured workers are going to need assistance. If the compensation to attorneys is not enough for attorneys to assist, then there is going to be an access problem.” Her reference was to the Florida Supreme Court case Ciastellanos v. Next Door Company, which explores whether attorney fee caps were constitutional.

 

Misclassification – Department of Labor Recovery

Today’s post comes from guest author Leonard Jernigan, from The Jernigan Law Firm.

The U.S. Department of Labor has recovered more than $1 million in back wages and liquidated damages for 196 employees of Bowlin Group LLC and Bowlin Services LLC out of Ohio and Kentucky. Bowlin Services installed cable for Insight Communications, a cable, telephone and Internet provider in Kentucky. The defendants misclassified 77 employees as independent contractors and violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by denying these workers access to critical benefits, including minimum wage, overtime, family and medical leave, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation and failing to maintain accurate payroll records.

Misclassifying employees negatively impacts our economy, generating losses to the U.S. Treasury, Social Security and Medicare funds, state unemployment insurance, and state workers’ compensation funds. It also leads to unfair competition because businesses that play by the rules are at a disadvantage.

This problem has become so acute in Tennessee that last month the legislature passed Senate Bill 833, which has been signed into law and imposes penalties on construction companies for misclassifying workers in an attempt to evade workers’ compensation premiums. A Tennessee study in 2012 revealed losses of up to $91.6 million in workers’ compensation premiums. North Carolina has identified the problem but has yet to take any action. Until states aggressively prosecute misclassification, this fraud will continue.

Misclassification Fraud Across the Country

North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue Signed Executive Order 125

Today’s post comes from guest author Leonard Jernigan from The Jernigan Law Firm.

“Misclassification” is a poorly chosen word to describe fraudulent conduct by employers who misclassify the status of their employees. For example, a roofing company may have 30 roofers doing the actual work but these workers are classified as “independent contractors” instead of employees. Why would they do that? At the end of the year these workers are sent a 1099 tax form that reports the wages paid, but the employer does not make any deductions for Medicare or unemployment, and doesn’t pay for workers’ compensation insurance. If you have a roofing company and you properly classify your employees, you are at a competitive disadvantage in bidding on jobs. Honest businesses are hurt by misclassification, and taxpayers are hurt because they pick up medical bills and other expenses created when one of these “independent contractors” gets hurt.

Another form of misclassification is when a construction company with 85 employees reports to its workers’ compensation insurance company that 75 of these people are staff workers, which results in a significantly reduced premium. Obviously, a construction worker is at greater risk of injury than an office worker. Again, the honest company who accurately reports the status of its employees is at a competitive disadvantage with the dishonest employer.

New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Virginia, Michigan, Florida, California, Texas and the vast majority of states across the country have been looking into this issue for several years and they have been aggressively prosecuting dishonest employers who try to game the system. North Carolina has finally joined these states. On August 22, 2012, Governor Beverly Perdue issued Executive Order 125, which created a task force to study this issue and try to get different agencies to communicate with each other and share information to identify employers who are failing to pay employee taxes. Hopefully, this task force will figure out how to enforce existing law. This blog will follow the progress of this task force. Stay tuned.

Wacky Worker’s Comp Week. Stripper Denied Worker’s Comp Benefits

The South Carolina Supreme Court found that an exotic dancer was an “Independent Contractor,” not an employee.

What a wacky week in the world of worker’s compensation.

We found that a stripper who was seriously injured by a bullet fired at the club where she was working was not entitled to worker’s compensation benefits because the South Carolina Supreme Court found she was not an employee, but rather a “Independent Contractor.” She had serious intestinal, liver, pancreas, kidney, and uterus injuries, and had her kidney removed – which rendered her unemployable as an exotic dancer. She claimed she was an employee because the club controlled her activities, including telling her when to dance, what music to dance to, and required her to strive to get VIP dances.

In Wisconsin, an employer’s inclination to mis-categorize an employee as an “Independent Contractor” can be tempting: avoidance of payment of worker’s or unemployment compensation premiums, payroll and Social Security taxes, and other employee benefits.

The Court of Appeals disagreed, indicating she decided the manner in which she performed her dances to satisfy the Boom Boom Room Club customers. In Wisconsin, an employer’s inclination to mis-categorize an employee as an “Independent Contractor” can be tempting: avoidance of payment of worker’s or unemployment compensation premiums, payroll and Social Security taxes, and other employee benefits. For many years the Courts and the Commission wrestled with the legal distinction between Independent Contractors and employees. Workers who maintained a separate business and held themselves out to render service to the public were Independent Contractors, if not employers themselves; all other workers were employees.

The legislature clarified the test for determining Independent Contractors status, indicating an Independent Contractor must maintain a separate business with his or her own office equipment, materials and other facilities, and hold or apply for a Federal Employer Identification Number. Seven other specific criteria apply. Any single criterion that rules out many Independent Contractors like the absence of a Federal I.D. Number or filing self-employment tax returns makes alleged “Independent Contractors” employees and covered under worker’s compensation in Wisconsin. Many employers including trucking companies, temporary help agencies, and up to and including exotic dancers are asked to sign Independent Contractor contracts when in fact they really are employees under worker’s compensation.