Godlewska v. HDA
916 F. Supp. 2d 246
E.D.N.Y2013Background
- Plaintiffs seek FLSA and related relief against City Defendants as alleged joint employer under a long-fought contract framework.
- Plaintiffs are home attendants employed by HDA under contract with HRA to provide PCS to City residents.
- Regulatory contract framework: NYSDOH and NYC social services regulate PCS; HRA administers the PCS program and contracts with HDA.
- HDA handles recruitment, supervision, training, timekeeping, and performance evaluations; City Defendants oversee compliance and funding through regulatory audits.
- The parties consented to the magistrate judge deciding summary judgment on joint employment status; ruling grants City Defendants’ motion and denies plaintiffs’ cross-motion.
- Court analyzes formal control (Carter factors) and functional control (Zheng factors) to determine joint employment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether City Defendants are plaintiffs' joint employer under FLSA | Plaintiffs contend formal/functional control over workers and payment structure show joint employment. | City Defendants argue no formal or functional control over day-to-day employment and pay decisions. | City Defendants not joint employer |
| Application of Carter factors to establish control | Carter factors show some functional control and scheduling influence by City Defendants. | Evidence shows HDA largely controls hiring, supervision, and day-to-day work; City’s role is limited to compliance and quality control. | Carter factors do not collectively show joint employment |
| Application of Zheng factors to determine functional control | HDA’s integration with City Defendants and potential for shifting contractors support joint employment. | Factual record shows limited functional control by City; no shared control of premises, staffing, or day-to-day work. | Zheng factors do not establish joint employment |
Key Cases Cited
- Carter v. Dutchess Community College, 735 F.2d 8 (2d Cir. 1984) (establishes the joint-employer test for formal control factors)
- Zheng v. Liberty Apparel Co., 355 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 2003) (defines functional-control framework for joint employment)
- Barfield v. N.Y. City Health and Hospitals Corp., 537 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2008) (joint employment analysis and scope of control under FLSA)
- Moreau v. Air France, 356 F.3d 942 (9th Cir. 2004) (quality-control supervision alone not sufficient for joint-employer status)