The First District Appellate Court held that a truck driver was an employee rather than an independent contractor.
The driver, a Polish speaking employee, fell at work while checking a load on his semitrailer truck. He lost consciousness and developed back, neck and shoulder problems.
The employer argued that the driver was an independent contractor, not an employee, and withheld workers’ compensation benefits.
At the arbitration hearing the driver testified testified that the employer required a pre-employment drug test, required written invoices for his runs, drove the employer’s trucks, was told which gas stations to purchase fuel from, signed an independent contractor’s agreement, followed routes created by the employer, called into the dispatch center several times per day, did not have Social Security taxes or income taxes taken form his paycheck and received a 1099 for his income.
The Arbitrator, Industrial Commission and Circuit Court all held that the driver was an employee rather than an independent contractor. The Appellate Court agreed stating, “No rigid rule exists regarding whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor.” The Court held that the most important factor in determining the employer-employee relationship was whether the employer has a right to control the employee’s actions at work, followed by the nature of the employee’s job duties compared to the employer’s regular business. The Court also wrote that the analysis has to look to the method of payment, right to fire and the degree of skill involved in the occupation. The Court found that the label the parties put on their relationship was not important in determining that the driver was an employee.
The Appellate Court held the driver proved that based on the criteria listed above, he was to be considered an employee for workers’ compensations benefits.
