Louis Carter v. Dutchess Community College
1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 22485, 26 Wage & Hour Cas. (BNA) 1239, 735 F.2d 8 (1984)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An inmate's status as a prisoner under the ultimate control of a correctional facility does not automatically preclude them from being an "employee" of an outside entity for the purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). An employment relationship must be determined by applying the multi-factor "economic reality" test on a case-by-case basis.
Facts:
- Louis Carter was an inmate at the Fishkill Correctional Facility (FCF) in New York.
- Dutchess Community College (DCC) operated a college program at FCF and proposed a plan to employ qualified inmates as teaching assistants.
- DCC determined the eligibility criteria for the teaching assistant positions and selected Carter, among others, to participate in the program.
- During the Fall of 1980, Carter was selected by DCC to conduct twenty 2.5-hour tutorial classes in business math within the prison.
- DCC paid Carter a total of $60, which equated to $1.20 per hour for his work.
- At the time, the federal minimum wage was $3.10 per hour, and student tutors working at DCC's main campus earned at least this amount.
- A DCC official informed Carter that the New York State Department of Correctional Services (DCS) restricted the maximum amount of compensation that could be paid to inmate tutors.
Procedural Posture:
- Louis Carter, an inmate, commenced a § 1983 action pro se in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) and Dutchess Community College (DCC).
- The District Court dismissed DCS from the action.
- Carter filed an amended complaint adding individual defendants and alleging a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
- The defendants filed motions to dismiss, which were referred to a Magistrate Judge for a report and recommendation.
- The Magistrate Judge treated the motions as motions for summary judgment and recommended granting them, concluding Carter could not be an 'employee' of DCC due to the prison's 'ultimate control.'
- The District Court adopted the magistrate's report and entered summary judgment in favor of the defendants.
- Carter (appellant) appealed the summary judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a prison's ultimate control over an inmate automatically preclude a finding that the inmate is an 'employee' of an outside entity under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)?
Opinions:
Majority - Timbers, Circuit Judge
No, a prison's ultimate control over an inmate does not automatically preclude a finding that the inmate is an 'employee' of an outside entity under the FLSA. The lower court erred by creating a two-tiered analysis of control and giving undue weight to the prison's 'ultimate control' as a dispositive factor. The FLSA is a broad remedial statute, and the proper standard for determining an employment relationship is the 'economic reality' test, which requires a case-by-case factual analysis of several factors. Congress did not explicitly exempt prisoners from the FLSA's coverage, and it would be an encroachment on legislative prerogative for the court to create such a categorical exclusion. Precedent shows that control can be substantial without being 'ultimate,' and previous cases involving inmates, while often finding against an employment relationship, still engaged in a particularized factual inquiry rather than applying a bright-line rule based on inmate status.
Analysis:
This decision rejects a per se rule that prisoners can never be employees under the FLSA when working for an outside entity. It establishes that the determination must be made using the fact-intensive 'economic reality' test, focusing on the nature of the relationship between the inmate and the outside entity. This ruling prevents lower courts from summarily dismissing inmates' minimum wage claims based solely on their status as prisoners, thereby opening the door for inmates to pursue FLSA protections if the outside entity exercises sufficient control typical of an employer.
