Late this morning, the Connecticut Supreme Court released one of its most important decisions on employment law in years. I’ve been talking about it prior posts but its decision is a welcome surprise for employers who feared the worst.
Because I’m out of the office for a few days, I’ve asked my colleague Chris Engler to give a brief recap. My thanks to him. We will have more in the upcoming days.
The long-awaited decision in Standard Oil v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation has arrived, and it brings good news for employers.
As you might recall, the Board of Review of the Employment Security Appeals Division had found that certain workers were employees of Standard Oil instead of independent contractors. The Board of Review’s analysis concluded that all three prongs of the ABC test rendered the workers to be employees.
The Connecticut Supreme Court has disagreed. Regarding part A, which focuses on the employer’s direction and control over the workers, the Court relied on the fact that the workers owned their own tools and vehicles, were independent licensed and certified, and were not supervised at their worksites by a representative of Standard Oil. As the Court further noted, “the installers/technicians were free to accept or reject any assignment offered to them without adverse consequences.”
Turning to part B of the test, which looks at whether the work was performed at the employer’s place of business, the Court looked at the case law from numerous states to guide its analysis. Its ultimate conclusion was that “the meaning of ‘places of business’ in the present context should not be extended to the homes in which the installers/technicians worked, unaccompanied by the plaintiff’s employees and without the plaintiff’s supervision.” (The “plaintiff” here was Standard Oil, the employer.) The Court specifically stated its goal of avoiding a broad interpretation of this part of the ABC test.
This decision is pleasant news for employers, especially those who use independent contractors to visit and service customers’ sites. It also suggests that the Supreme Court is taking a firmer stance against the Employment Security Division’s broad interpretations of who is eligible for unemployment benefits.
Employers who use independent contractors should breathe a sigh of relief. But employers who use them should be sure to follow legal advice to make sure the relationships can hold up under court scrutiny