Compliance Stuff

A Pennsylvania federal court dealt a blow to staffing firms that classify recruiters as exempt from overtime, ruling that a staffing firm must provide their IT recruiters overtime pay because they perform “routine sales production work” rather than administrative duties. The February 11 decision in  Thomas v. TEKsystems, Inc.  marks the second federal court in recent years to reject the administrative exemption for recruiters at the same company, and raises serious questions about whether staffing firms across the industry have been misclassifying their own workers for years . Here’s what staffing companies need to know about this decision and four steps to help your wage and hour compliance efforts. The Decision: Recruiters Are Producers, Not Administrators In  Thomas v. TEKsystems , seven former recruiters sued their employer, alleging the IT staffing firm misclassified them as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s overtime requirements . US District Judge William...

A new federal appeals court decision just delivered welcome clarity for staffing companies that provide optional benefits and deduct the expense from employees’ wages. The December 5 ruling from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a staffing agency can deduct the cost of optional job-site transportation and does not have to pay workers for travel, waiting time, or tool-pickup tasks, so long as those activities aren’t part of the employee’s core work . It’s a solid win for staffing agencies in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama, but industry leaders across the country can also benefit from the lessons this case teaches. Here are seven key takeaways staffing companies can take from the  Villarino v. Pacesetter Personnel Service  decision, along with a list of specific action items you can put into place. What Happened? The dispute began when a group of day laborers sued Florida-based Pacesetter Personnel Service, arguing that the company’s long-standing transportation system ...

Staffing firms across the country are facing increased scrutiny from the federal government over how they respond to client demands – and a new lawsuit can provide lessons for your organization . The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a September 29 lawsuit accusing a South Carolina-based agency of refusing to hire or refer women for laborer positions at a client’s plant. According to the agency, the case shows how staffing firms can be held liable for workplace law violations even if they claim to just be “following orders” from clients . Staffing industry firms should take note of the legal theories at play – and consider the five compliance lessons this lawsuit can teach you. When Client Demands Cross the Line The EEOC’s complaint, filed in federal court in Alabama on September 29, alleges that  WorkSmart Staffing, Inc., systematically excluded women from laborer jobs they placed at client company TCI of Alabama between August 2020 and August 2023 . Key allega...

Healthcare employers and the staffing firms who serve them should take note: federal authorities recently announced they will specifically target the use of noncompetes and other restrictive covenants in the healthcare space . The Federal Trade Commission announced on September 10 that it issued warning letters to several large healthcare employers and staffing firms, urging them to review their noncompete agreements and other restrictive covenants to ensure they are legally sound and don’t infringe on workers’ rights. What are the five biggest takeaways from this latest threat, and what are the five actions steps you should consider to avoid legal complications? Quick Backstory FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson explained in  his September 10 announcement  that the letters “urge recipients to conduct a comprehensive review of their employment agreements – including any noncompetes or other restrictive covenants – to ensure they are appropriately tailored and comply with th...