Employee or Independent Contractor? Understanding Your Rights Under the FLSA

Understanding whether you are an employee or an independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is critical to knowing your rights and protections under the law. The U.S. Department of Labor has issued regulations (29 CFR part 795, effective March 11, 2024) to clarify how to determine a worker’s classification.

Why Does Classification Matter?

Employees are entitled to protections under the FLSA, including minimum wage, overtime pay, and other legal safeguards. Independent contractors, on the other hand, operate their own businesses and do not receive these protections. The key to classification lies in the economic reality test, which examines whether a worker is economically dependent on an employer or truly in business for themself.

The Economic Reality Test

The economic reality test consists of six key factors to determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor:

  1. Opportunity for Profit or Loss Depending on Managerial Skill
  • Does the worker negotiate their pay, accept or decline work, or make independent business decisions?
  • If the worker’s earnings are dependent on their own business efforts, they are likely an independent contractor.
  • If the worker’s earnings rely on work assignments from the employer, they are likely an employee.

Example: A landscaper working for a company without control over assignments is likely an employee. A landscaper who markets their services, sets their own rates, and hires helpers is likely an independent contractor.

  1. Investments by the Worker and Employer
  • Are the worker’s investments capital or entrepreneurial in nature?
  • Employees typically do not make significant business investments.

Example: A graphic designer using company-provided tools is likely an employee. A designer who purchases their own software, markets their services, and rents office space is likely an independent contractor.

  1. Degree of Permanence of the Work Relationship
  • Continuous work relationships indicate employee status.
  • Project-based, non-exclusive work suggests independent contractor status.

Example: A cook working for the same venue every week is likely an employee. A cook preparing meals for different events and venues is likely an independent contractor.

  1. Nature and Degree of Control
  • Who determines schedules, pricing, work assignments, and supervision?
  • More control by the employer indicates employee status.

Example: A registered nurse with a fixed schedule and supervised work is likely an employee. A nurse who sets their own prices and works for multiple clients is likely an independent contractor.

  1. Extent to Which the Work Performed is Integral to the Employer’s Business
  • Is the work essential to the employer’s main business function?

Example: Farmworkers picking tomatoes for a tomato farm are likely employees. An accountant performing tax services for a farm is likely an independent contractor.

  1. Skill and Initiative
  • Is the worker using their skills in a way that demonstrates business initiative?

Example: A highly skilled welder following company instructions is likely an employee. A welder marketing their own specialty services and seeking clients is likely an independent contractor.

Other Things to Consider

  • No single factor solely determines a worker’s status, nor is any individual economic reality test factor—or combination of factors—more important than the others. Rather, the working relationship should be assessed based on the totality of the circumstances.
  • Titles and labels (such as “freelancer” or “contractor”) do not determine employment status.
  • Signing an independent contractor agreement does not automatically make a worker an independent contractor.
  • Receiving a 1099 form instead of a W-2 does not necessarily mean a worker is an independent contractor.
  • Factors like where work is performed or how a worker is paid do not solely determine classification.

Employer Responsibilities Under the FLSA

If a worker is classified as an employee, the employer must comply with the following FLSA requirements:

  • Minimum Wage: Employees must be paid at least $7.25 per hour (or the state/local minimum wage, if higher).
  • Overtime Pay: Employees must receive 1.5 times their regular pay rate for all hours worked over 40 per week, unless a relevant exemption applies.
  • Recordkeeping: Employers must maintain proper wage and hour records.
  • Retaliation Protections: Employees are protected from employer retaliation when asserting their rights.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, Fact Sheet #13

Are You a Worker Who Has Been Misclassified?

Worker misclassification is a serious issue that can deny workers fair wages and benefits. If you believe you have been misclassified as an independent contractor, you may have legal recourse.

Free, No-Obligation Case Evaluation

At Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., we advocate for workers’ rights and fight for fair treatment under the law. If you have questions or suspect you’ve been misclassified, reach out to us for a free, no-obligation evaluation of your potential legal claims.

📞 Michael Yarnoff, Esq. – (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
📧 Email: [email protected] | [email protected]

No-Cost Legal Assistance

Our class action legal services are provided on a contingency-fee basis, meaning you are not responsible for any fees or litigation expenses. 

SEND US A MESSAGE

Contact Us

ADDRESS

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
2001 Market Street
Suite 2500
Philadelphia, PA 19103

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

Scam Alert: Beware of “QR Code” on Unexpected Packages

Scam Alert: QR Code on an Unexpected Package //

Imagine receiving an unexpected package addressed to you. Inside, there’s a note claiming it’s a gift, but it doesn’t mention who sent it. Instead, it asks you to scan a QR code to find out more or to get return instructions. While this might seem intriguing, it could be a tactic to steal your personal information.

If you’re confident it’s a genuine gift, you can keep it. However, be aware that such scenarios could involve a new variation of a brushing scam.

The Risks of Scanning Unknown QR Codes

Scanning the QR code might redirect you to a phishing website designed to harvest your sensitive information, such as usernames, passwords, or credit card details. Worse, it could install malware on your device, providing hackers with unauthorized access.

Steps to Take If You Scanned the QR Code

If you mistakenly scanned the QR code and provided your credentials, act quickly:

Monitoring and Safeguarding Against Identity Theft

If you suspect misuse of your personal information, follow these steps:

  1. Obtain your free credit report from AnnualCreditReport.com and review it for unfamiliar accounts or activities. Free weekly reports are available.
  2. Check your bank and credit card statements for unauthorized transactions.
  3. Consider additional measures to protect your identity, such as freezing your credit or placing a fraud alert on your report.

What to Do If Your Identity Is Compromised

If identity theft occurs, report the incident and create a recovery plan at IdentityTheft.gov.

Proactive Tips for Staying Secure

What About the Package?

By law, you are generally allowed to keep unordered packages as gifts. Learn more about your rights when you get unordered merchandise here.

Source: Consumer.ftc.gov

 

 


SEND US A MESSAGE

Contact Us

ADDRESS

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
2001 Market Street
Suite 2500
Philadelphia, PA 19103

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

Agenus Inc. (AGEN) Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit

Agenus Inc. Shareholder Derivative Complaint (AGEN) 

A shareholder derivative complaint was filed on January 15, 2025, against certain officers and directors of Agenus Inc. (NASDAQ: AGEN), alleging violations of state and federal law which occurred between January 23, 2023, and July 17, 2024. View the Agenus complaint.

If you own shares of Agenus, you may have legal claims against the company’s directors and officers.

To help us assess your legal options, please complete our securities questionnaire. Alternatively, if you would like to discuss the case and your legal rights, click here to send us a message or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., at (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, or by email at [email protected] or [email protected], for a free, no-obligation evaluation of your potential claims.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a leading, multidisciplinary plaintiff-side class action law firm committed to protecting investors from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The firm’s partners have collectively served as Lead Counsel or Co-Lead Counsel in high-profile cases that have secured over $10 billion in recoveries for both institutional and individual investors.

For more information, visit our website at Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

SEND US A MESSAGE

Contact Us

ADDRESS

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
2001 Market Street
Suite 2500
Philadelphia, PA 19103

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

Aehr Test Systems Securities Class Action (AEHR)

AEHR TEST SYSTEMS, INC. (NASDAQ: AEHR) – Lucid Alternative Fund, LP v. Aehr Test Systems, et al., 3:24-cv-08683 (Dec. 3, 2024, N.D. Cal.)

On December 3, 2024, a federal securities class action was filed on behalf of investors that acquired Aehr Test Systems securities between January 9, 2024 and March 24, 2024, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants’ alleged violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

Learn more about this case by clicking Aehr Test Systems complaint.

If you own AEHR stock and have questions about potential legal claims, please email us at [email protected] or complete our Securities Class Action Questionnaire. All submissions are confidential, evaluations of potential legal claims are free, and there is no obligation to take further action.

SEND US A MESSAGE

Contact Us

ADDRESS

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
2001 Market Street
Suite 2500
Philadelphia, PA 19103

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

FTC Report Reveals Alarming Price Markups by Big 3 PBMs on Lifesaving Specialty Drugs

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has published a second interim staff report that sheds light on troubling practices within the prescription drug middleman industry, specifically focusing on Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs). These PBMs play a critical role in negotiating drug prices and managing prescription drug benefits, but their actions are raising concerns, particularly with respect to specialty generic drugs.

The latest report from the FTC reveals that the Big 3 PBMs—Caremark Rx (CVS), Express Scripts (ESI), and OptumRx—have been inflating prices of specialty generic drugs by hundreds and even thousands of percent. The drugs impacted by these exorbitant price hikes include treatments for cancer, HIV, and heart disease. Over the period from 2017 to 2022, these price increases allowed the Big 3 PBMs and their affiliated pharmacies to generate a staggering $7.3 billion in excess revenue, all while patient, employer, and healthcare plan sponsor payments for drugs continued to rise annually.

Key Findings from the FTC Report

The FTC’s report draws from a variety of data sources, including special orders issued by the FTC in 2022 under Section 6(b) of the FTC Act. Some of the key findings from the latest report include:

  1. Significant Price Markups: PBMs imposed dramatic markups on numerous specialty generic drugs. For example, drugs for cancer and HIV treatment saw prices marked up by thousands of percent. These price hikes were not only excessive, but disproportionately affected drugs dispensed through PBM-affiliated pharmacies compared to unaffiliated pharmacies.
  2. Steering Profitable Prescriptions: The data suggests that PBMs may be directing highly profitable prescriptions—those marked up by over $1,000 per prescription—towards their own affiliated pharmacies, rather than unaffiliated ones.
  3. Revenue Surplus: Over the study period, PBM-affiliated pharmacies generated over $7.3 billion in revenue beyond the estimated acquisition cost of the drugs, as measured by the National Average Drug Acquisition Cost (NADAC). This surplus revenue grew at an alarming rate of 42 percent annually between 2017 and 2021.
  4. Spread Pricing: In addition to the markups, the Big 3 PBMs earned an estimated $1.4 billion through spread pricing, i.e., billing their plan sponsor clients more than they reimburse pharmacies for drugs—on the analyzed specialty generic drugs over the study period.
  5. Impact on Operating Income: The analyzed specialty generic drugs were a key driver of the operating income for the parent healthcare conglomerates behind the Big 3 PBMs. In 2021, this revenue represented 12 percent of the total operating income reported by the PBMs’ parent healthcare conglomerates’ business segments that include their PBM and pharmacy business in 2021.
  6. Increasing Drug Spending: Between 2017 and 2021, the cost of specialty generic drugs continued to rise at significant rates. Plan sponsors paid a total of $4.8 billion for these drugs in 2021 alone, while patients contributed $297 million in cost-sharing. Between 2017 and 2021 plan sponsors and patient payments both increased at compound annual growth rates of 21% for commercial claims, and 14%-15% for Medicare Part D claims.

The Call for Action

FTC Chair Lina M. Khan emphasized the need for swift action to address the growing issue. “The FTC should keep using its tools to investigate practices that may inflate drug costs, squeeze independent pharmacies, and deprive Americans of affordable, accessible healthcare—and should act swiftly to stop any illegal conduct, ”Khan stated.

Hannah Garden-Monheit, Director of the FTC’s Office of Policy Planning, added, “FTC staff have found that the Big 3 PBMs are charging enormous markups on dozens of lifesaving drugs.” “We also found that this problem is growing at an alarming rate, which means there is an urgent need for policymakers to address it.”

For more details on the FTC’s findings, read the full report here.

Target Corporation Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit (TG)

TARGET CORPORATION (NYSE: TG) – McCollum v. Cornell, et al., 2:25-cv-00021 (Jan. 9, 2025, M.D. Fla.) – Verified shareholder derivative complaint filed against certain current and former board members and executive officers seeking to remedy alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and violations of federal law. Learn more about this case by clicking Target Corporation complaint.

If you own TG stock and have questions about potential legal claims, please email us at [email protected] or complete our Securities Class Action Questionnaire. All submissions are confidential, evaluations of potential legal claims are free, and there is no obligation to take further action.

SEND US A MESSAGE

Contact Us

ADDRESS

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
2001 Market Street
Suite 2500
Philadelphia, PA 19103

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]