1 / 3

TITLE VII and PARTNERSHIP

TITLE VII and PARTNERSHIP. Partners not covered by Title VII -- are not employees Decision to promote to partner is covered by Title VII -- “condition of employment” -- Hishon v. King & Spaulding Is person bona fide partner -- can’t use title simple to defeat coverage . Partner or Employee?.

gil
Télécharger la présentation

TITLE VII and PARTNERSHIP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. TITLE VII and PARTNERSHIP • Partners not covered by Title VII -- are not employees • Decision to promote to partner is covered by Title VII -- “condition of employment” -- Hishon v. King & Spaulding • Is person bona fide partner -- can’t use title simple to defeat coverage

  2. Partner or Employee? • “Common Law Test” – Clackamas Gastroenterology Assocs., P.C. v. Wells [123 S.Ct. 1673 (2003)]: • Can the organization hire/fire or set rules to control the individual’s work? • Does the organization supervise the individual’s work – to what extent? • Does the individual report to someone higher up the organization? • Whether and to what extent is the individual able to influence the organization? • Did the parties intend the individual to be an employee – in contract or agreement? • Does the individual share in the profit/loss and liabilities of the organization?

  3. Other Legal Tests • “Economic Realities” Test -- look to factors to determine status: • participation in profit / loss • investment in firm • exposure to liability • partial ownership of firm assets • voting rights • direction and management of firm • “Per Se” approach where firm is corporation • Both were rejected by the Court in Clackamas

More Related