ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN THE SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS PREPARED BY NYPPL

September 07, 2011

Independent contractors


Independent contractors
Viniotis v Town of Islip, 280 A.D.2d 731

Designating an individual an “independent contractor” does not automatically result in such status as the Town of Islip discovered in the Viniotis case.

Mary C. Viniotis signed a contract with the Town that stated that she was an independent contractor engaged to provide part-time housekeeping services under the Town's expanded in-home services program for its elderly residents.

Viniotis was paid at an hourly rate and submitted “requisition forms” supplied by Islip for the payment of her compensation. The Town set her work schedule and designated the chores to be done for the clients.

The court commented that Viniotis was given a written evaluation of her performance every three months and was issued an identification card indicating that she was a Town employee. Also noted was the fact that Viniotis was required her to take her “mandatory vacation as directed by the Town.”

The Appellate Division sustained the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's ruling Viniotis and others “similarly situate” were Town employees and that Islip had to pay unemployment insurance contributions based upon the compensation it paid to these home care providers.

The court, in effect, decided that under the facts of this case, the Town could not disclaim these individuals as town employees simply on the basis of a signed a contract indicating that they served as independent contractors.

As Islip's home care providers are not independent contractors, it appears that the positions must now be classified and appointments made consistent with the controlling provisions of the Civil Service Law. 

N.B. A new position in the Classified Service is automatically in the competitive class unless placed in a different jurisidictional classification by law or by actions of the responsible Civil Service Commission.

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the decisions summarized here. Accordingly, these summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. AGAIN, CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
New York Public Personnel Law Blog Editor Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, New York Guard. Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.
Copyright 2009-2024 - Public Employment Law Press. Email: nyppl@nycap.rr.com.