TALARICO v. PUBLIC PARTNERSHIPS, LLC
5:17-cv-02165
| E.D. Pa. | Jan 30, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Ralph Talarico, on behalf of himself and other direct care workers (DCWs), sued Public Partnerships, LLC (PPL), alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act (MWA) for alleged failure to pay overtime.
- DCWs provided home-based services to disabled individuals (Participant Employers, or PEs) under Pennsylvania’s Medicaid Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS) Waiver Program, specifically through the Self-Directed Services (SDS) model.
- PPL functioned as a fiscal agent, processing payroll, tax documentation, and compliance paperwork for PEs, but did not recruit, hire, fire, or supervise DCWs.
- The case turned on whether PPL was a "joint employer" of DCWs (with the PEs) and thus liable for unpaid overtime.
- The district court previously found in favor of PPL on summary judgment; the Third Circuit reversed, finding factual issues, and remanded for trial. After a bench trial, the district court again held for PPL.
- The court’s joint employer analysis applied the four-factor "Enterprise test" and considered the economic realities of the relationship.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PPL was a joint employer of DCWs | PPL exercised sufficient control over DCWs to be employer | PPL was merely a fiscal agent; actual employers are PEs | PPL is not a joint employer; PEs control hiring, firing, etc. |
| Extent of PPL’s authority to hire and fire | PPL’s role in background checks and paperwork shows control | Hiring/firing is solely by PEs; PPL’s role is ministerial | PPL lacks authority to hire/fire; only facilitates legal compliance |
| Setting work rules and pay rates | PPL sets wage ceilings/floors and mandates certain rules | PPL implements rules set by state, does not set rates | Rules/pay rates set by state; PPL just administers them |
| Supervision and day-to-day control | PPL controls payroll, records, and orientation | Only PEs supervise DCWs and set job duties | PPL not involved in daily supervision; only manages records |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Enterprise Rent-a-Car Wage & Hour Employment Practices Litigation, 683 F.3d 462 (3d Cir. 2012) (sets the four-factor joint employer test for FLSA claims)
- NLRB v. Browning-Ferris Industries of Pennsylvania, 691 F.2d 1117 (3d Cir. 1982) (provides analytical foundation for joint employer doctrine)
- Goldberg v. Whitaker House Cooperative, Inc., 366 U.S. 28 (1961) (economic reality test governs employment relationship under FLSA)
- Bonnette v. California Health & Welfare Agency, 704 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1981) (additional guidance on joint employer factors under FLSA)