Misclassification of Delivery Drivers

August 30, 2023

U.S. District Court has held that when a company could not demonstrate that three delivery drivers were free from its control, that the delivery drivers had been misclassified as independent contractors and were awarded partial summary judgement.


Three delivery drivers brought suit in U.S. District Court against their employer alleging misclassification by the employer and unlawfully deducted wages. When the drivers moved for summary judgement in their favor, the court put the burden on the employer of showing that the drivers were free from its control.


Here, though there is some dispute about the exact requirements, drivers must drive box trucks. They are circumscribed in how they deliver the products. They are subject to a dress code. They have no control over their customer base. Helpers are prescreened. They are monitored by the employer before, during, and after deliveries. Indeed, the only aspects of their work [delivery service providers (DSPs)] had control over were the aspects that a typical employer would like to relinquish: paying and training additional employees and maintaining tools and equipment.


Therefore, the court held that the employer “cannot relinquish ‘control’ over these costs, retain control over all other aspects of employment, and receive the unfair ‘windfall’ that results from ‘avoiding their statutory obligations, shifting financial burdens to state and federal governments, and gaining an unfair advantage in the marketplace.”


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288. 

Royal Law at Thunderbirds Hockey Playoff Game in the Executive Perch

April 21, 2025
Friday April 18th: Amy Royal, Fred Royal, and Derek Brown attended the Springfield Thunderbirds playoff game! They enjoyed watching the Thunderbirds play the Charlotte Checkers from the Executive Perch.

Massachusetts Wage Act: Not Even a Single Day Delay

April 18, 2025
Employee's Wage Act Claim Case Overview : In Turgut v. Hitachi Rail STS USA, Inc., Plaintiff filed a putative class action against a company, Defendant, alleging violation of the Wage Act by not paying wages within six days of the pay period's end. Defendant argued that its employees fell under the exception that allowed seven days for payment; however that exception only applies to hourly workers that work all seven days of a work week. The plaintiff is looking to represent a class of employees that received W-2 wages in what he alleges was in an untimely manner. The case was originally filed in state court on February 20, 2025 but was moved to federal court. Reason for Treble Damages: Under Rueter v. City of Methuen, the seminal case regarding the Massachusetts Wage Act (“Wage Act”), the proper measure of damages under the Wage Act is treble damages. Previously employees were only entitled to interest on the unpaid wages if the company paid before proceedings started. It kept noncompliance from being as costly as it is now. Currently any violation can be subjected to treble damages for the total amount of the alleged late payment. It’s expected that we will see more cases pick up by attorneys because the treble damages make it worthwhile for their clients as well as themselves, given this recent ruling. Judge's Ruling : The Judge ruled that the six-day deadline applies. The Judge stated that while the complaint didn’t make it clear if plaintiff is hourly or salary, plaintiff only worked five days a week, meaning that the seven-day exception did not apply as the Wage Act was written. Legal Implications Legislative History : The Wage Act provides different deadlines for an employee’s final pay based on the number of days worked in a week. This case also emphasizes that having salaried workers on staff does not fulfill the requirement of having employees work seven days a week. Significance of One Day : The judge emphasized that even a single day's delay in payment can significantly impact employees living paycheck to paycheck. What Employers need to know Make sure you’re aware of your employees’ pay cycle and make compliance a company priority. It’s more cost effective to pay a day or two earlier than it is to head to court over claims of violations. This ruling expands on the Reuter ruling by clarifying the Wage Act rules in relation to hourly employees. If an hourly employee resigns, ensure that automatic payment systems (as well as the employer’s own internal pay systems) are aligned with the requirements of this ruling. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.