•  
  •  
 

Document Type

Article

Media Type

Text

Abstract

Platforms such as Uber and TaskRabbit avoid employment obligations by categorizing their workers as independent contractors. Declining to follow overtime, antidiscrimination, and other workplace mandates, these platforms claim to employ no one. Applied on a grand scale, the entire project of platform labor threatens to destabilize our contemporary understanding of employment law. But not all platform workers possess the characteristics of genuine independent contractors, as courts first envisioned that category. Judges did not originally formulate the independent contractor distinction to define the boundaries of workplace protections; rather, the independent contractor classification was designed to limit the liability of masters for their servants' torts. Courts in these early cases identified certain workers "independent contractors" who possessed the skill, autonomy, and financial strength to pay for their own tortious misconduct and, accordingly, stand alone in the marketplace. Today, when judges evaluate whether gig workers are independent contractors, they should look for the same hallmarks of commercial self-determination that originally prompted the independent contractor distinction. Fortunately, a few recent judicial decisions have embraced a simplified standard "the so-called ABC test" to assess whether contemporary workers are bona fide independent contractors. In contrast to more popular tests that have produced indeterminate results, the ABC standard begins with the presumption that workers who provide labor to firms are employees. If businesses want to overcome this presumption, they must prove three separate elements to show that their workers possess the marketplace strength of legitimate independent contractors. By using the ABC test to sort workers based on their economic autonomy, courts can more effectively distinguish between normal employees and the genuine independent contractors of platform work.

First Page

379

Last Page

427

Publication Date

7-1-2019

Department

Other

ISSN

0734-1490

Language

eng

Publisher

Northern Illinois University Law Review

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.