Ansoumana v. Gristede's Operating Corp.
2003 WL 173957, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 985, 255 F. Supp. 2d 184 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A company that utilizes workers provided by a third-party staffing agency may be deemed a 'joint employer' under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and thus jointly liable for wage and hour violations, if the company exercises sufficient control over the workers' daily activities and their labor is an integral part of its business operations.
Facts:
- Duane Reade, Inc., a large drugstore chain, contracted with the Hudson/Chelsea defendants to supply its stores with delivery workers.
- The Hudson/Chelsea defendants hired workers, primarily unskilled immigrants from West Africa, to perform delivery services.
- Hudson/Chelsea classified these workers as independent contractors, paying them a flat rate of $20-$30 for working eight to eleven hours per day, six days a week.
- Some workers were required by Hudson/Chelsea to sign statements acknowledging their status as independent contractors.
- The workers were assigned to specific Duane Reade stores, where they reported for work daily.
- Duane Reade managers and personnel provided the workers with delivery instructions, directed them on how much money to collect from customers, and maintained logs of their deliveries.
- Between deliveries, Duane Reade staff directed the workers to perform in-store tasks such as stocking shelves, bagging items, and providing security.
- If a Duane Reade manager was dissatisfied with a worker's performance, they would request that Hudson/Chelsea reassign that worker and provide a replacement.
Procedural Posture:
- Faty Ansoumana and a class of delivery workers filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Duane Reade, Inc. and the Hudson/Chelsea defendants.
- The complaint alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Minimum Wage Act for failure to pay minimum wage and overtime.
- The district court certified a class of delivery workers who had worked for the defendants.
- After a period of discovery, both the plaintiffs and the defendants filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment to resolve the legal questions of employee status and joint employer liability.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), is a retail company a 'joint employer,' and thus jointly liable for wage violations, when it uses workers supplied by a third-party contractor, supervises their daily tasks, and integrates their services directly into its business operations?
Opinions:
Majority - Hellerstein, District Judge
Yes. A retail company is a 'joint employer' under the FLSA when the economic reality of the relationship shows that it exercises substantial control over workers supplied by a contractor and that their work is integral to its business. The court first determined that the delivery workers were employees of the Hudson/Chelsea defendants, not independent contractors, by applying the 'economic reality' test from Brock v. Superior Care, Inc. The court found that Hudson/Chelsea exercised control over hiring, firing, and pay; the workers had no opportunity for profit or loss and made no investment; the work required little skill or initiative; and the work was integral to Hudson/Chelsea's business. Secondly, the court found Duane Reade was a joint employer with Hudson/Chelsea. Applying the 'economic reality' test for joint employment from cases like Rutherford Food Corp., the court reasoned that the delivery workers performed an integral service for Duane Reade, enabling it to compete by offering home delivery. Duane Reade exercised direct control by supervising the workers' daily tasks on its premises. The court concluded that a company cannot use outsourcing as a means to evade its obligations under the FLSA.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the expansive reach of the Fair Labor Standards Act's 'joint employer' doctrine, particularly in the context of outsourced labor and the gig economy. It establishes that courts will look beyond formal contractual labels like 'independent contractor' to the 'economic reality' of the working relationship. The ruling serves as a significant precedent holding 'end-user' companies potentially liable for the wage violations of their labor contractors if they exercise functional control over the workers. This increases the legal risk for companies that rely on staffing agencies, compelling them to ensure their contractors are complying with labor laws to avoid joint and several liability.
