Whicker v. Compass Group USA, Inc., 246 N.C. App. 791

Crothall (division of Compass Group) contracted with Novant to provide environmental services at Novant facilities, including Forsyth Medical Center; the contract stated Crothall personnel "will be considered employees of Crothall."
Crystal Whicker was employed and paid by Crothall and assigned to work at Forsyth Medical Center; she was injured in the hospital parking lot on June 2, 2013, while off the clock on lunch break.
Crothall reported and denied the claim; Whicker later listed both Crothall and Novant on her Form 18 and sued Novant after Crothall denied coverage.
The Industrial Commission Deputy Commissioner found Whicker did not sustain a compensable injury in the course of employment and that she was not a joint or lent employee of Novant; the Full Commission affirmed.
The Commission made unchallenged findings that Crothall hired, paid, trained, supervised, disciplined, and terminated Whicker; Novant did not hire or directly control Crothall employees and could only request their removal in writing.
The Court of Appeals reviewed de novo whether an employment relationship existed and affirmed that Novant was not Whicker’s employer under joint-employer or lent-employee doctrines.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Novant was a joint employer of Whicker at time of injury	Whicker argued an implied contract and sufficient control by Novant (training, facility rules, required tests) made Novant a joint employer	Novant argued Crothall hired, paid, trained, supervised, disciplined, and retained employment control; contract designates employees as Crothall’s	Held: No — no contract of hire with Novant and insufficient simultaneous control to create joint employment
Whether Whicker was a "lent" (special) employee of Novant	Whicker argued she was effectively lent to Novant because she performed services integral to hospital operations and followed Novant policies	Novant argued Crothall remained general employer, Novant did not control details of work, and cleaning is distinct from hospital’s medical services	Held: No — no implied contract of hire, work not essentially Novant’s, and Novant lacked control required for lent-employee status

Morales-Rodriguez v. Carolina Quality Exteriors, Inc., 205 N.C. App. 712 (review standard for employment relationship)
Lucas v. Li'l Gen. Stores, 289 N.C. 212 (jurisdictional fact; burden to prove employment relationship)
Royster v. Culp, Inc., 343 N.C. 279 (exception to coming-and-going rule for employer-controlled premises)
Leggette v. McCotter, Inc., 265 N.C. 617 (recognition that one person can be employee of two employers)
Anderson v. Texas Gulf, Inc., 83 N.C. App. 634 (definitions of joint and lent employee doctrines)
Shelton v. Steelcase, Inc., 197 N.C. App. 404 (contractual allocation of supervision bars finding of dual employment when contract designates employer)
Harris v. Miller, 335 N.C. 379 (explicit agreements about right of control are dispositive)