Labor Lawyer Queens Workforce Classification Resolution

The workers argued that their daily tasks were performed on the manufacturer’s premises and that production schedules indirectly affected their work pace. 

They asserted that this operational overlap demonstrated employer control sufficient to establish an employment relationship. 

The dispute centered on whether operational coordination rose to the level of legal supervision under New York standards.

• Authority over hiring, termination, and discipline

• Responsibility for payroll, tax withholding, and benefits

• Control over work schedules and task assignments

• Existence of independent management by the subcontractor

Documentary evidence demonstrated that the subcontractor retained exclusive authority over workforce management, attendance tracking, and corrective actions, while the manufacturer’s involvement was limited to production specifications and quality standards.

The legal team engaged directly with worker representatives to explain the distinction between operational coordination and legal employer control under New York precedent. 

Financial and non financial settlement terms were negotiated, including clarification of future work structures and a formal waiver of employee status claims.

The resulting agreement included a release of claims, non litigation covenants, and compliance acknowledgments aligned with New York General Obligations Law.

The employer implemented clearer separation of management authority, reinforced subcontractor autonomy, and revised internal protocols to ensure ongoing compliance with New York Labor Law and Workers’ Compensation coverage requirements. 

These measures significantly reduced the risk of future classification disputes.