970 F. Supp. 2d 794
N.D. Ill.2013Background
- This is a putative FLSA collective action and Illinois wage claims against Comcast and Comcast entities for alleged joint-employer status.
- W & E Communications, Inc. supplied technicians to Comcast; Zampos and Gonzalez worked for W & E, with some period in 2006–2011.
- The Preferred Vendor Agreement designates independent contractor status and limits mutual control between Comcast and W & E.
- Comcast may perform quality control, background checks, and dispatch coordination but does not directly employ the technicians.
- W & E sets pay for technicians and handles hiring and firing decisions; Comcast’s role is mainly oversight and contract administration.
- Plaintiffs allege Comcast’s control over hiring, pay, scheduling, and records creates joint-employer liability under multiple statutes, which Comcast moves to dismiss via summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Comcast is a joint-employer of W & E technicians under the FLSA | Zampos/Gonzalez contend Comcast controls working conditions | Comcast asserts minimal control; W & E is primary employer | No joint-employer liability under FLSA |
| Whether Comcast is a joint-employer under the IWPCA/IMWL | Joint-employer status would extend wage protections | No significant shared control over essential terms of employment | No joint-employer liability under Illinois wage laws |
| Whether Comcast is a joint-employer under the IECA | IECA presumes employee status for contractor services | W & E employs the workers; Comcast has no wage-control input | IECA joint-employment claim fails as a matter of law |
Key Cases Cited
- Moldenhauer v. Tazewell-Pekin Consolidated Communications Ctr., 536 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. 2008) (joint-employer factors; control essential but not exclusive)
- Jacobson v. Comcast Corp., 740 F. Supp. 2d 683 (D. Md. 2010) (quality control/contracting framework; limits on joint control)
- Vill. of Winfield v. Illinois State Labor Relations Bd., 223 Ill. Dec. 33, 678 N.E.2d 1041 (1997) (Illinois test: significant control over terms/conditions of employment)
- Andrews v. Kowa Printing Corp., 298 Ill. Dec. 1, 838 N.E.2d 894 (2005) (Illinois joint-employer considerations under IWCPA)
- World Painting Co. v. Costigan, 359 Ill. Dec. 755, 967 N.E.2d 485 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012) (IECA analysis aligned with joint-employer principles)
- Haynes v. Tru-Green Corp., 154 Ill. App. 3d 967, 107 Ill. Dec. 792, 507 N.E.2d 945 (1987) (IMWL/IWCPA guidance on wage-and-hour status)