## Facts

- Fred Meyer outsourced nighttime janitorial work at Puget Sound grocery stores and contracted with Expert Janitorial to supply janitorial services.
- Expert did not hire cleaners; it subcontracted the work to smaller janitorial companies that directly engaged the plaintiffs.
- The plaintiffs worked as night janitors in Fred Meyer stores and regularly worked more than 40 hours per week.
- The subcontractors classified the plaintiffs as independent contractors and did not pay minimum wage or overtime.
- The plaintiffs sued under Washington’s Minimum Wage Act (MWA), alleging Expert and Fred Meyer were “joint employers” liable for unpaid minimum wage and overtime.
- Record evidence suggested Expert and Fred Meyer had contractual responsibilities tied to subcontractor compliance with wage-and-hour laws and were aware of wage issues in the subcontracting chain.

## Issues

1. Whether Washington’s MWA permits joint-employer liability without a formal, common-law employment relationship.
2. What standard governs joint-employer status under the MWA.
3. Whether summary judgment for Expert and Fred Meyer was proper under the correct standard.

## Decision

- The court held the MWA recognizes joint-employer liability and may impose liability even absent a formal employment relationship.
- The court adopted an FLSA-based “economic reality” analysis for joint-employer determinations under the MWA, rejecting a narrow control-focused test.
- The court affirmed reversal of summary judgment for Expert and Fred Meyer and remanded because the trial court applied an unduly restrictive test and material factual disputes remained under the economic-reality framework.

## Legal Principles

- The MWA is remedial and must be liberally construed; its definition of “employ” is broad and extends beyond common-law employment concepts.
- Joint-employer status under the MWA is determined by an “economic reality” inquiry evaluating the totality of the circumstances, not any single dispositive factor.
- Relevant, nonexclusive factors include: degree of control (direct or indirect); workers’ opportunity for profit or loss based on managerial skill; workers’ investment in equipment/materials and use of helpers; whether the work requires special skill; permanency of the relationship; and whether the work is integral to the alleged employer’s business.
- Summary judgment is improper when the record, viewed under the economic-reality framework, permits a reasonable inference that the alleged joint employers benefited from and permitted the work and the workers were economically dependent on the business relationship.

## Conclusion

The court confirmed that Washington’s Minimum Wage Act allows joint-employer liability and required courts to use an FLSA-style economic-reality test; because the trial court relied on a narrow control test, the dismissal of claims against the contractor and retailer was reversed and the case returned for further proceedings.


Becerra Becerra v. Expert Janitorial, LLC, 181 Wash. 2d 186, 332 P.3d 415 (Wash. 2014)