Harmon & Davies, P.C.

Posts Tagged ‘independent contractor’

PA Workplace Misclassification Act

by HDlawblog Posted: Friday, 4/29/2016

In March 2016 the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry produced a white paper report on the “Administration and Enforcement of the Construction Workplace Misclassification Act in 2015.” Under the Act, the DLI investigates and penalizes construction companies that misclassify employees as independent contractors.

Here’s a quick snapshot from the Report:

But in 2013, under similar circumstances, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court held that the general contractor’s payments to the subcontractor did not afford protection, and the Prompt Payment Act did not shield the contractor and the surety from liability. Berks Products Corp. v. Arch Ins. Co., 72 A.3d 315.

Those are the cases of Workplace Misclassification that the Bureau of Labor Law Compliance has investigated in the past five years. Notably, there were more investigations in 2015 than the previous four years combined. Also, the investigations netted $217,450 in penalties, which is a 1,612% increase from the 2014 penalty amount. In fact, the Bureau only collected $12,700 in penalties in 2014. Point being, DLI is emphasizing the enforcement of this Act, and all construction companies should take a very close look at how they supply manpower to their projects.

The Workplace Misclassification Act applies to all construction companies working on all types of projects—public, private, residential, or commercial. The Act sets forth a checklist of considerations that are scrutinized when determining if a laborer on a project is actually an independent contractor. If the laborer is misclassified as an independent contractor—when in fact he is really an employee—DLI will levy a fine. In some instances, DLI has the authority to seek criminal prosecutions.

To comply with the Act, every independent contractor must have a written contract. Further, every laborer should be analyzed with consideration of the numerous other requirements under the Act. DLI generally receives its leads from (1) complaints filed by laborers; (2) findings made during construction site visits; and (3) referrals from other government agencies, particularly the Office of Unemployment Compensation Tax Services. To avoid penalties, it is best to review your laborers and seek legal advice as necessary.

What’s Happening Now . . .

11.2 % Increase

Increase in construction spending for first two months of year, comparing 2015 to 2016.
Construction spending for January & February 2015 was $141.3 billion.
Construction spending for January & February 2016 was $157.1 billion.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau News, February 2016 Construction at $1,144.0 Billion Annual Rate, U.S. Dept. of Commerce (Apr. 1, 2016).

Newsletter written by Jeffrey C. Bright, Esq. , an attorney licensed in Pennsylvania and Maryland. For more information, contact an attorney at Harmon & Davies, P.C.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Tags: Berks Products Corp. v. Arch Ins. Co, Bureau of Labor Law Compliance, construction law, contract, contractor, Department of Labor, department of labor and industry, DLI, DOL, employee, Harmon & Davies, independent contractor, Jeff Bright, Jeffrey Bright, L&I, penalty, Pennsylvania Construction Attorney, prompt payment act, subcontractor, Workplace Misclassification
Posted in Construction | Comments Off

Classification Crackdown

by HDlawblog Posted: Tuesday, 3/27/2012

The United States Department of Labor estimates that 30% of employers are misclassifying employees as independent contractors, which results in billions of dollars in lost revenue every year. Citing a desire to minimize losses in contributions to unemployment insurance funds, protect workers’ rights and “level the playing field” for employers that abide by the law, the DOL has launched the Federal Misclassification Initiative, where they are partnering with the IRS and a number of state governments to share information. The memoranda of understanding contain an agreement to share information, in order to determine when workers are being misclassified. The cooperative efforts will likely lead to multi-pronged scrutiny and enforcement proceedings.

The initiative will ensure that a worker classified as an independent contractor does not have to bring a claim against his or her employer to allege misclassification. Instead, the DOL, IRS and/or state agency may initiate directed investigation which could lead to an audit of the employer’s payroll practices. The DOL expects this initiative will increase the percentage of DOL-directed investigations to approximately 35% of all its investigations. In particular, the DOL stated that they will be targeting certain industries, including delivery companies, construction companies, companies with installation workers, sales organizations, companies that provide on-site computer technicians and those companies that hire them, and cleaning franchises.

The difficulty comes in defining an independent contractor, because no unified definition exists. Despite the difficulty in defining independent contractor, the pitfalls are significant. Employers who misclassify their employees as independent contractors risk numerous potential claims including tax claims (state, federal, and FICA); wage (e.g., overtime), indemnification, and benefit claims,; claims for civil penalties, including penalties for failing to withhold taxes or pay final wages, or failing to provide itemized wage statements; unanticipated tort claims to third parties and wrongful discharge claims; and criminal investigations.

There are a number of steps that employers can take to prevent misclassification. Most importantly, employers must show that they do not exercise direction or control over their independent contractors. Employers should negotiate the rate of payment, require a signed agreement stating the independent contractor status, and require the worker to provide transportation, tools and equipment. Employers should never require reporting, issue handbooks, provide evaluations or prohibit the worker from working for or with others.

If you believe that employees may be misclassified, or you have any questions regarding classification in general, you should contact legal counsel as soon as possible.

This article is authored by attorney Casey L. Sipe and is intended for educational purposes and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law only, not to provide specific legal advice. Any particular questions should be directed to your legal counsel or, if you do not have one, please feel free to contact us.