A Nu Transfer, Inc. v. Department of Labor and Employment Sec. Div. of Employment Sec., 82-1329
| Decision Date | 22 February 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-1329,82-1329 |
| Citation | 427 So.2d 305 |
| Parties | A NU TRANSFER, INC., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Ciravolo & Feldman and Bennett G. Feldman, Miami, for appellant.
Ollie L. Evans, Miami, for appellee.
Before HENDRY, BARKDULL and BASKIN, JJ.
Appellant, an inland carrier for the shipment of freight, appeals from a final order of the Department fixing appellant's liability for unemployment compensation on the grounds that individuals performing services for the appellant in the capacity of "truck drivers" are in "employment" pursuant to Section 443.036(17), Florida Statutes, (1981).
The appellant is an inland carrier for shipment of freight in Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties. In the conduct of its business, appellant dispatches cargo to its own drivers known as "clockmen", in company owned vehicles and also to "owner-operators". Owner-operators provide their own vehicles and pay for their own maintenance, repairs, gasoline, oil, tires, licenses, equipment and gear. However, appellant does deduct $50.00 per week from their commissions for liability insurance. 1 Owner-operators are paid based on a percentage of the applicable rate per pull and for additional waiting time. The appellant deducts no social security or income tax from their paychecks. Each owner-operator is responsible for providing his own workmen's compensation coverage. Owner-operators do not accrue and are not paid for sick leave or vacation time.
Owner-operators are not required to work a specific number of hours. They can refuse to accept a particular pull within their own discretion without any penalty or fear of reprisal. Owner-operators may work for any competitor of appellant. Contracts between the owner-operator and appellant are terminable at will by either party.
Measuring the degree of control against that referred to in Justice v. Belford Trucking Co., 272 So.2d 131 (Fla.1972); Cantor v. Cochran, 184 So.2d 173 (Fla.1966); Magarian v. Southern Fruit Distributors, 146 Fla. 773, 1 So.2d 858 (1941); Herbert Hayes Yacht and Ship Sales, Inc., v. Lovell, 406 So.2d 1259 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Collins v. Federated Mutual Implement and Hardware Insurance Co., 247 So.2d 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971) which is necessary to support an employee-employer relationship as contrasted to an independent contractor, we find the owner-operators in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hilldrup Transfer & Storage of New Smyrna Beach, Inc. v. State, Dept. of Labor and Employment Sec., Div. of Employment, 82-1592
...The relationship between Hilldrup and its operators has a legitimate business purpose. Compare A Nu Transfer, Inc. v. Dept. of Labor & Employment Security, 427 So.2d 305 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) with Justice v. Belford Trucking Company, Inc., 272 So.2d 131 (Fla.1972). 6 It is not simply a subterf......
-
WESTERN PORTS v. EMPLOYMENT SEC. DEPT., 48294-7-I.
...Sec. Bd. v. Motor Express, Inc., 69 N.E.2d 603, 117 Ind.App. 113 (1946); A Nu Transfer, Inc., v. Department of Labor & Employment Sec. Div. of Employment Sec., 427 So.2d 305 (Fla.App.3d Dist.1983). Among the distinguishing factors in another case in which the owner/drivers were not entitled......
-
Judy v. Tri-State Motor Transit Co.
...Moreover, Judy did not have an ICC permit, nor did he own any of his equipment. Cf. A Nu Transfer, Inc. v. Dep't of Labor & Employment Security Div., 427 So.2d 305 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983) (court found worker to be independent contractor; unlike Judy, worker provided his own vehicles and paid......
-
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Charles, GEORGIA-PACIFIC
...Transfer and Storage v. State, Department of Labor, etc., 447 So.2d 414 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); A Nu Transfer, Inc. v. Dept. of Labor and Employment Security, 427 So.2d 305 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Roark v. Peters, 242 So.2d 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). 2 The only Florida cases to the contrary are Just......