The purpose of the FAAAA
was to prevent state laws from meddling in interstate commerce and interfering
with routes, rates and services.
Remember the federal preemption argument is at the heart of ASECTT et
al. v. FMCSA – state law cannot be used to hold shippers and brokers liable
for negligent selection when using carriers determined to be safe to operate
under federal law.
Now federal preemption and
the FAAAA has been used successfully to defeat reclassification of
owner-operators as employees under a grievous Massachusetts statute. The United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia has decided in Sanchez v. Lazership that a Massachusetts statute of
federal application cannot be used to reclassify independent contractors as
employees in lights of the federal truth in leasing regulations. This decision, which is thorough and well
reasoned, for the first time seriously extends the preemption argument into the
worker’s compensation arena – an area always thought to be the exclusive
province of the states.
This is an important
decision in light of the efforts of the Massachusetts Delivery Association to challenge the same statute in MDA v. Coakley
which is pending in Massachusetts
on cross-motions for summary judgment. (AEMCA filed an amicus curiae in support
of this case.)
There is already one bad
decision in the Martins case which is in conflict with Sanchez
and a relatively new judge will be deciding the MDA lawsuit in view of
this conflicting precedent on the same statute.
Whether the MDA
case is won or lost, the Sanchez decision gives our industry hope that
federal preemption and the FAAAA, even in the pro-labor arena of state worker’s
compensation law, offers an important defense in the protection of small
businesses and the independent contractor model upon which many are based.
No comments:
Post a Comment