Under Massachusetts’ Workers’ Compensation law, employers must provide workers’ compensation benefits for employees injured in the course and scope of performing job duties. Notably, Massachusetts law only requires such benefits for employees, not independent contractors; as such, the proper characterization of a worker is essential, as demonstrated in a recent Massachusetts case where the court discussed how to determine someone’s status. If you were hurt while working, it is in your best interest to consult a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation lawyer about your options.
Factual and Procedural History
It is reported that the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant misclassified them as independent contractors when they were, in fact, employees, in violation of Massachusetts law. The plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and similarly situated individuals, alleged that the defendant failed to provide wages and benefits and violated state minimum wage laws. They argued that despite being labeled as independent contractors, they were effectively employees due to the level of control the defendant exercised over their work.
It is alleged, however, that the defendant argued that the plaintiffs were not employees but independent contractors and sought summary judgment based on a precedent set in a prior case. The plaintiffs cross-moved for partial summary judgment, seeking a ruling that they were employees under Massachusetts law. The case was initially filed in state court but was later removed to federal court. After several motions, the court certified a class for certain claims, and the matter was reassigned to a different judge before the summary judgment motions were considered.
Independent Contractors Versus Employees
The court reviewed the case by assessing the appropriate legal test to determine whether the plaintiffs were employees or independent contractors. The defendant argued that the test from a Massachusetts case, which applies to joint employer liability, should be used. The decision outlines circumstances under which a company can be held liable as a joint employer, emphasizing control over workers’ conditions, hiring and firing powers, and the maintenance of employment records.
The plaintiffs, however, argued that the “ABC test” under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 148B should apply, which presumes that a worker is an employee unless the employer can prove otherwise by meeting all three prongs of the test.
The court found that the defendant’s framework was applicable because the relationship between the parties was similar to the one in the cited case, where a company contracts with another to provide services, and that second company hires workers.
The court was not persuaded by the plaintiffs’ reliance on a previous decision where partial summary judgment was granted under the ABC test, as the facts in that case differed significantly from the present case.
Consequently, the court denied both the defendant’s and the plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment, ruling that the case involved genuine disputes of material fact that required resolution at trial.
Consult with an Experienced Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer
If you’ve been injured while performing your job duties, you have the right to seek workers’ compensation benefits, though your employer may try to dispute your claim. Speaking with an attorney can clarify your legal options. Attorney James K. Meehan is an experienced Massachusetts workers’ compensation lawyer who can guide you through the process and help you pursue the compensation you deserve. To arrange a confidential consultation, contact Attorney Meehan at 508-822-6600 or fill out our easy-to-use online contact form.