In Massachusetts, the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA) often bar employees from bringing negligence claims against their employers for workplace injuries. However, when questions arise regarding whether an entity qualifies as an employer under the WCA, courts must determine liability based on statutory definitions and case law. A recent Massachusetts Superior Court decision examined whether a temporary worker could sue a host company for injuries sustained on the job. If you are dealing with a workplace injury and have questions about employer liability, consulting an experienced Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney is essential.
History of the Case
It is alleged that the plaintiff, a temporary worker assigned by a staffing agency, suffered a serious thumb injury while operating a riveting machine at the defendant’s manufacturing facility. The plaintiff had been working at the facility for several years through different staffing agencies, with her most recent placement facilitated by an agency that provided temporary laborers to the defendant under an oral agreement.
It is reported that the defendant provided training and supervision to the plaintiff and directed her job responsibilities while she worked at the facility. However, the staffing agency retained the right to terminate or reassign the plaintiff without requiring approval from the defendant. The staffing agency also provided workers’ compensation insurance for its temporary workers, including the plaintiff, and paid insurance premiums as part of its service fees to the defendant. Following her injury, the plaintiff applied for and received workers’ compensation benefits under the staffing agency’s insurance policy.
Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit against the defendant, arguing that it failed to provide a reasonably safe work environment and appropriate equipment. The defendant moved for summary judgment, asserting that it was immune from liability under the WCA because it qualified as the plaintiff’s employer.
Exclusivity Provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act
On review, the court examined whether the defendant qualified as an employer under the WCA, which would render the plaintiff’s claims barred by the exclusivity provision. Massachusetts law recognizes a “general employer” (the staffing agency) and a “special employer” (the host company) relationship, with liability for workers’ compensation benefits typically resting with the general employer unless an agreement specifies otherwise.
It is reported that the court found that the defendant did not qualify as an employer under the WCA for two key reasons. First, while the defendant controlled the plaintiff’s work responsibilities, the staffing agency retained significant control over employment decisions, including hiring and termination. Second, the defendant did not directly provide workers’ compensation coverage for the plaintiff, as the staffing agency’s insurer covered all claims involving temporary workers.
The court distinguished this case from prior decisions where host companies were deemed employers, emphasizing that the defendant lacked an agreement with the staffing agency to assume responsibility for workers’ compensation benefits. Because the defendant was not legally responsible for such benefits, it was not entitled to immunity under the WCA. Thus, the court denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, allowing the plaintiff’s negligence claim to proceed.
Talk to an Assertive Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Attorney
Workplace injury claims can be complex, particularly when multiple entities are involved in employment relationships. If you are unsure about your rights following a workplace accident, you should talk to a lawyer about your rights. Attorney James K. Meehan of the Law Office of James K. Meehan is an assertive workers’ compensation attorney who can offer you guidance and advocate for your interests. You can reach Attorney Meehan at 508-822-6600 or complete the firm’s online form to set up a conference.