“3rd Circ. Won’t Revisit Joint Employer Ruling in OT Suit,” Law360
The Third Circuit on Wednesday declined to revisit its ruling that a payroll company must face a proposed overtime class and collective action from Pennsylvania Medicaid-funded home care workers because jurors could find that the company was a joint employer.
In an order, a Third Circuit panel denied a petition by Boston-based Public Partnerships LLC for a rehearing by the judges who took part in the previous ruling, leaving in place the decision from December to send the case back to district court.
"It is hereby ordered that the petition for rehearing by the panel is denied," U.S. Circuit Judge Michael A. Chagares said in the order.
. . .
In its December ruling, the appeals panel said PPL could be considered a joint employer using the test from the Third Circuit's 2012 decision from In re Enterprise Rent-A-Car Wage & Hour Employment Practices Litigation.
Under the four-factor test for determining when to hold multiple businesses liable for actions pertaining to the same worker, courts are supposed to consider the business' ability to hire and fire workers, how much control it has over their working conditions, the amount of supervision it has over workers and whether it maintains their employment records.
. . .
Talarico is represented by Caroline E. Bressman, Robert L. Schug and Rachhana T. Srey of Nichols Kaster, Richard A. Katz of Arnold Beyer & Katz and by Christine E. Webber of Cohen Milstein.
The complete article can be accessed here.