Two weeks ago, I wrote about whether harassment training should be offered to employees in "the Twilight Zone" -- mainly, lead persons and contingent workers (temporaries and independent contractors). Reader Paul C. suggested that I do a post on the dangers associated with keeping "temps" too long, which I thought was a great idea. So, Paul, thank you!
In our insecure economy, temps and independent contractors allow employers to get the work done while allowing the companies to stay flexible enough to survive and, we hope, thrive. But there are abuses, and dangers if employers misclassify workers, or if they keep their "temps" around so long that they become "perms" in reality if not in name. Here are four reasons to be very careful about how you use contingent workers.
No. 1. You are a nice employer. You don't want to be an exploiter. Contingent workers usually don't get benefits. (If they're employed by a temp agency, they may or may not get these through the agency.) They usually are not paid as well as your regular employees. This is ok for a limited period, when you are having an uptick in business but don't know whether it will last long enough to bring on new "regular" employees. Otherwise, though, you ought to be looking to convert those temps into regular employees or, if they don't meet your standards or fit into your longer-term business needs, releasing them within a reasonable time.
No. 2. You don't want to have a group of long-term "second-class citizens." This is related to Reason No. 1. Two classes of employees can cause a lot of strife in the workplace. Again, if you expect the temps to be short-term, then fine. But the potential for resentment compounds the longer they stay. And, as we all know, people who feel that they've been treated unfairly are more likely to file EEOC charges and cause you other types of grief.
TODAY IS THE LAST DAY! The American Bar Association is accepting nominations for the 2013 ABA Blawg 100. You don't have to be a lawyer to make a nomination. Just go to the page here and make your nomination, along with a short statement explaining why you think your nominee should win. We very much appreciate the support you've shown to Employment & Labor Insider in the past and would appreciate your vote again this year if you are so inclined. Again, today is the last day to submit nominations. Thank you!
No. 3. Contingent workers may lull you into a false sense of security. Hey, they're temps! Or independent contractors. That means all's fair, right? Uh, no. First, if they're temps, you may legally be a "joint employer" with the temp agency -- this is especially likely (if not dead certain) if your employees supervise the temps' day to day work. If you're a joint employer, you could be liable right along with the temp agency. If they're misclassified "independent contractors," you could be vicariously liable for their negligent acts . . . and a lot more, as we'll discuss below.
Yeah, but it's so hard to fire people any more, and if they're contingent, we can get rid of them for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all, right? Wrong. Yes, you can have stricter rules for contingent workers -- for example, by having a "two strikes and you're out" policy instead of the four-step progressive discipline policy you may use with your regular employees. But the equal employment opportunity laws apply to temps as well as regular employees. So does the National Labor Relations Act. These laws would also apply to "independent contractors" who were legally "employees."
Another problem with contingent workers: They lull employers into a false sense of security.
True story: Years ago, two temps at a distribution center complained at an employee meeting about having to work too much overtime. After the meeting concluded, the company released the two temps -- for complaining too much, of course. The temps found a really good lawyer and filed a charge with the National Labor Relations Board alleging that they were "released" for engaging in protected concerted activity. And they were. The company had to settle because it had made the mistake of thinking it could do whatever it wanted with a temp.
4. When you mess up with a contingent worker, it can cost a lot of money. Microsoft got nailed for this in the 1990's with programmers who were misclassified as "independent contractors." Microsoft ended up having to pay them benefits, including the value of stock options. For Microsoft. In the 1990's.
Another true story: A company hired a full-time executive as an "independent contractor" and paid her significantly more than it would have paid an "employee" so that she would have enough to cover her own taxes, her share of Social Security, and her health insurance. Everything was swell until about two years later, when the company decided to end the relationship. She got a really good lawyer, and they demanded that she get a severance package. The company didn't have a leg to stand on -- legally, she was an employee. So they had to give her a six-figure severance package.
If you misclassify an employee as an "independent contractor," you can be liable for overtime pay, back taxes, fines for failure to withhold taxes, the employer's share of Social Security, health, life, and disability insurance, stock options, and, yes, even severance pay.
See? You might as well bring them onto your payroll.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010