In a case that will impact the hiring practices of New Jersey employers, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that temporary workers can bring discrimination lawsuits against the companies that retain their services. The decision in Faush v. Tuesday Morningwill not impact all temp workers, but could result in liability in cases where the employer exerts a certain degree of control over the day-to-day activities of the employee.
The Facts of Faush v. Tuesday Morning
Plaintiff Matthew Faush, an African–American, is employed by Labor Ready, a staffing firm that provides temporary employees to several clients, including defendant Tuesday Morning, Inc. According to Faush, Labor Ready assigned him to work at one of Tuesday Morning’s stores, where he was subjected to racial slurs and racially motivated accusations and was eventually terminated.
Faush filed an employment discrimination suit against Tuesday Morning, claiming violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, among other statutes. The District Court granted summary judgment to Tuesday Morning on the ground that, because Faush was not Tuesday Morning’s employee, Tuesday Morning could not be liable for employment discrimination. The plaintiff appealed.
The Court’s Decision on Faush v. Tuesday Morning
The Third Circuit concluded that Tuesday Morning should be considered the plaintiff’s employer for the purposes of Title VII. In reaching its decision, the Third Circuit relied heavily on the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court holding in Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Darden, which established a multi-factor test for determining whether an employment relationship exists. As articulated by the appeals court, the primary factors include “which entity paid [the employees’] salaries, hired and fired them, and had control over their daily employment activities.”
With regard to how the plaintiff was paid, the Third Circuit highlighted that “although Tuesday Morning made its payments to Labor Ready, rather than to the temporary employees, those payments were functionally indistinguishable from direct employee compensation.”
The appeals court also noted that Tuesday Morning had control over hiring and firing. “If Tuesday Morning was unhappy with any temporary employee for any reason, it had the power to demand a replacement from Labor Ready and to prevent the ejected employee from returning to the store,” the panel noted.
In addition, as to control over the plaintiff’s day-day activities, the Third Circuit stated: “Tuesday Morning personnel gave Faush assignments, directly supervised him, provided site-specific training, furnished any equipment and materials necessary, and verified the number of hours he worked on a daily basis.”
The Message for New Jersey Employers
For New Jersey employees, the message is clear — hiring temporary workers will not shield you from liability from discrimination suits (and many other claims). For staffing agencies, the decision also highlights the need to educate clients and workers about the roles and responsibilities of all parties. Contracts should also clearly articulate the legal relationships.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
How Will Faush v. Tuesday Morning Impact New Jersey Employers?
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
In a case that will impact the hiring practices of New Jersey employers, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that temporary workers can bring discrimination lawsuits against the companies that retain their services. The decision in Faush v. Tuesday Morningwill not impact all temp workers, but could result in liability in cases where the employer exerts a certain degree of control over the day-to-day activities of the employee.
The Facts of Faush v. Tuesday Morning
Plaintiff Matthew Faush, an African–American, is employed by Labor Ready, a staffing firm that provides temporary employees to several clients, including defendant Tuesday Morning, Inc. According to Faush, Labor Ready assigned him to work at one of Tuesday Morning’s stores, where he was subjected to racial slurs and racially motivated accusations and was eventually terminated.
Faush filed an employment discrimination suit against Tuesday Morning, claiming violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, among other statutes. The District Court granted summary judgment to Tuesday Morning on the ground that, because Faush was not Tuesday Morning’s employee, Tuesday Morning could not be liable for employment discrimination. The plaintiff appealed.
The Court’s Decision on Faush v. Tuesday Morning
The Third Circuit concluded that Tuesday Morning should be considered the plaintiff’s employer for the purposes of Title VII. In reaching its decision, the Third Circuit relied heavily on the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court holding in Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Darden, which established a multi-factor test for determining whether an employment relationship exists. As articulated by the appeals court, the primary factors include “which entity paid [the employees’] salaries, hired and fired them, and had control over their daily employment activities.”
With regard to how the plaintiff was paid, the Third Circuit highlighted that “although Tuesday Morning made its payments to Labor Ready, rather than to the temporary employees, those payments were functionally indistinguishable from direct employee compensation.”
The appeals court also noted that Tuesday Morning had control over hiring and firing. “If Tuesday Morning was unhappy with any temporary employee for any reason, it had the power to demand a replacement from Labor Ready and to prevent the ejected employee from returning to the store,” the panel noted.
In addition, as to control over the plaintiff’s day-day activities, the Third Circuit stated: “Tuesday Morning personnel gave Faush assignments, directly supervised him, provided site-specific training, furnished any equipment and materials necessary, and verified the number of hours he worked on a daily basis.”
The Message for New Jersey Employers
For New Jersey employees, the message is clear — hiring temporary workers will not shield you from liability from discrimination suits (and many other claims). For staffing agencies, the decision also highlights the need to educate clients and workers about the roles and responsibilities of all parties. Contracts should also clearly articulate the legal relationships.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
