Derek Brown
Professor Janet Smith
Employment Law BA370
30 June 2011
Baker v. Flint Engineering & Construction The court agreed and concluded the plaintiffs were employees of Flint, rather than independent contractors, for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The court went on to say, in most respects, the plaintiffs were no different from any other workers hired by Flint and were treated as employees. The plaintiffs were hired to complete a job, were told their working hours, were told their hourly pay rate, and were told on what portion of the project they would be working during a given workday. Although the plaintiffs were the most skilled workers on the job site, they were not asked to exercise their discretion in applying their skills; they were told what to do and when to do it. The only substantial difference between plaintiffs and the other workers on the job site is the plaintiffs were required to supply equipment to perform their jobs. This fact alone, however, does not alter the realities of their working situation. Nor does it allow them to make any type of substantial profit above wages they were paid. Ultimately, the plaintiffs, like other workers hired by Flint, were dependent upon Flint for the opportunity to render services for however long a particular project lasted. The economic realities test is on approach used by courts to distinguish between employees and independent contractors, particularly in Fair Labor Act cases. The focus of the