- November 20, 2015
- Posted by: admin
- Category: News
In Anna Coorey vs. Google Inc. and Beavex Inc., a proposed class action lawsuit was filed in the Massachusetts state court by a driver against the Google Company. The plaintiff alleged that she was improperly classified as an independent contractor and was owed expenses.
According to the Attorney for Anna Coorey, drivers were the employees under Massachusetts state law, as she was required to work only for Google during her shift and also that the drivers were required to wear Google Express uniforms and every delivery assigned to them during each shift.
The Superior Court of Massachusetts, at Middlesex stated that an individual who regularly performs services that are the usual and customary activities of a business must be deemed an employee of that business. (Fucci v. E. Connection Operating, Inc., 2009 Mass. Super. LEXIS 421 (2009).
In Okeke v. Dynamex Operations East, Inc., 31 Mass. L. Rep. 536 (2013), the Superior Court of Massachusetts, at Middlesex stated that, under Massachusetts law, a worker is deemed an employee unless the putative employer can show that: (1) the individual is free from control and direction in connection with the performance of the service, both under his contract for the performance of the service and in fact; (2) the service is performed outside the usual course of business for the employer; and (3) the individual is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession, or business of the same nature as that involved in the service performed. Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, §148B. The employer bears the burden of proof, and, because the conditions are conjunctive, its failure to demonstrate any one of the conditions suffices to establish that the services in question constitute "employment" within the meaning of §148B.