Section 42
EMPLOYEE STATUS, Economic reality test, Independent contractor, Worker's Compensation
CITE AS: McKissic v Bodine, 42 Mich App 203 (1972); lv den 388 Mich 780 (1972).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: John S. McKissic
Employer: Harold Bodine
Docket No: NA (This case arose under the Worker's Comp Act.)
COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: The test to determine whether an employee-employer relationship exists for purposes of the Worker's Compensation Act is the "economic reality test", and the factors used to apply the test are whether: (1) the employer will incur liability if the relationship terminates at will; (2) the work performed is an integral part of the employer's business; (3) the employee primarily depends upon the wages for living expenses; (4) the employee furnishes equipment and material; (5) the employee holds himself out to the public as able to perform certain tasks; (6) the work involved is customarily performed by an independent contractor. Along with (7) the factors of control, payment of wages, maintenance of discipline, and the right to engage or discharge employees; and (8) weighing those factors which will most favorably effectuate the purposes of the Act.
FACTS: Claimant worked full-time at a Fisher Body plant. During the period in issue he was off work recovering from an injury. He advertised as a handy man and painted a sign "McKissic Contracting" on his truck. He furnished his own materials, engaged his own workers and worked on his own schedule. He did repairs and general maintenance and while doing such work for Bodine claimant fell and injured himself.
DECISION: Claimant was primarily employed by Fisher Body, and his relationship to Bodine was one of an independent contractor.
RATIONALE: "The plaintiff was primarily employed by another. The doing of odd jobs was a method of securing extra cash for his own enjoyment. He furnished his own tools. He worked for Bodine only when he was available. He contracted each job for a given price, and held himself out to the public as a handyman.... If he desired protection while acting as an independent contractor, he could have made arrangements for accident insurance...."
12/91
NA