Separate Companies May Constitute a Single Employer for Liability Purposes

Is your company a single employer?

Earlier this year, a Massachusetts Superior Court for the first time applied the “single integrated employer” theory of liability to a case involving a restaurant chain, ruling that employees from separately incorporated but related entities could bring a class action against each of the entities under the state Wage Act. (See our March blog post “New Case Establishes Liability for Boston Restaurant Owners with Multiple Locations.”) This decision made it more economically viable for employees to collectively assert Wage Act claims for violations of their rights, exposing the assets of all entities.

Rudolph Friedmann attorneys Jon Friedmann and Adam Shafran are involved in a matter with facts similar to Fitzgerald, et. al. v. The Chateau Restaurant Corporation, et. al. referenced in our March blog post. They highlight critical steps corporations can take to limit liability under the “single integrated employer” theory – a status that is determined by examining four factors:

  • Interrelation of operations
  • Common management
  • Centralized control of labor relations
  • Common ownership

Each element of the test is fact intensive and no one factor determines the level of interconnectedness amongst related businesses.

Organizations can reduce their risk and limit liability with proper planning and implementation. Some of the steps that can be taken include:

  • Limiting the commonality of officers, directors and owners
  • Confining the parent corporation’s role to broad issues and avoiding day-to-day review or control of the individual entities
  • Limiting the movement of employees among the various entities and identifying actions as “terminations” and “hires” not “transfers”
  • Setting up separate payroll accounts for each business and having each company pay its own bills
  • Creating HR materials, such as employee handbooks, applications and policies, for each entity and avoiding the use of common materials
  • Identifying the entities as separate companies on web sites and other marketing collateral and using distinct letterhead and business cards for each company

There are numerous additional actions companies can take to separate their operations. If you own multiple related businesses, contact Jon Friedmann or Adam Shafran to discuss the details of your operating structure and ensure that you have taken the necessary steps to limit the liability of your organization.

Published by
RF Lawyers

Recent Posts

Mere Acquisition and Dual Ownership Not Enough to Pierce the Corporate Veil

In Parexel Int'l LLC v. PrisymID Ltd., the United States District Court of Massachusetts allowed…

1 week ago

Casey Sack Presented at MBA’s program “Expert Witnesses in Construction Disputes: Strategic Lawyering at All Stages of the Case”

Casey Sack presented at the Massachusetts Bar Association’s CLE program, “Expert Witnesses in Construction Disputes:…

3 weeks ago

Jim Rudolph Named a Go To Construction Lawyer by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

Jim Rudolph has been named a Go To Construction Lawyer by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. The…

1 month ago

Does a General Contractor’s Commercial General Liability Insurance Provide Coverage Against Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Defective Work?

Construction projects often involve work performed by subcontractors. While this makes sense given the varying…

1 month ago

Rudolph Friedmann Secures Sweeping Victory for Business Owner in Complex Business Litigation Case Including Award of Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to Indemnification Agreement

Firm’s client accused of breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and breach of contract; lawsuit requested…

1 month ago

Civil Litigants Beware, Recorded Conversations Are Coming in as Evidence

Because of a loophole in the Massachusetts Wiretap Statute, also known as G.L. c. 272,…

2 months ago