Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

Article Title

You’re Hot Then You’re Cold, You’re Yes Then You’re No: How Inconsistency in the Courts Leaves Employers and Employees Vulnerable

Authors

Andrea Mireles, Chicago-Kent

Abstract

While federal labor and employment laws try to categorize employers and employees, the lines remain blurry. Via unhelpful definitions, inconsistent application or ever-changing tests, employers and employees are often left vulnerable under these statutes—the employer because it is not clear whether he is liable under the law, and the employee because it is not clear whether he is protected under the law.

In this Note, I discuss the Seventh Circuit’s recent case regarding an indirect employer and how to establish an employment relationship under the ADA. This Note suggests that the Seventh Circuit did not properly apply a five-factor test when analyzing this employment relationship, and in fact, the court should not have granted summary judgment for the defendant employer because there was a genuine dispute of material fact. Finally, this Note sheds light on the consequences of inconsistency in the courts when using several standards to establish an employment relationship.

Streaming Media

Recommended Citation

Andrea Mireles, You’re Hot Then You’re Cold, You’re Yes Then You’re No: How Inconsistency in the Courts Leaves Employers and Employees Vulnerable, 14 Seventh Circuit Rev. 209 (2018).
Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/seventhcircuitreview/vol14/iss1/9