House Dems Urge DOL To Scrap Contractor Proposal

A group of more than 40 House Democrats urged the U.S. Department of Labor to withdraw a proposed rule on independent contractor classification, saying it would weaken labor protections by replacing the current standard with one resembling an earlier "ineffective" framework.

In a Friday letter to acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling, lawmakers criticized the agency's February proposal to rescind the 2024 independent contractor rule under the Fair Labor Standards Act in favor of a standard outlined in the 2021 regulation, calling the move "overly narrow."

They said the change would heighten the risk of worker misclassification and depart from established precedent.

"Overly narrow interpretations of this relationship expose workers to greater risk of misclassification — which results in catastrophic losses in wages and benefits for that individual and subsequent losses in state and federal revenues," the lawmakers wrote.

The letter was led by Reps. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., Donald Norcross, D-N.J., Debbie Dingell, D-Mich. and Steven Horsford, D-Nev., co-chairs of the Congressional Labor Caucus, and signed by dozens of other Democrats, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.

The lawmakers defended the current rule, saying it provides clarity while safeguarding wage protections.

"The 2024 rule offers clarity for independent contractors while providing certainty to employees that their rights to basic labor standards such as minimum wage, overtime pay, unemployment insurance, a safe and healthy workplace, and worker's compensation remain protected," they wrote.

"By contrast, the proposed rule is wholly inconsistent with these goals," the letter added.

The proposed rule, titled the Employee or Independent Contractor Status Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, would replace a similarly named rule issued during the Biden administration.

The lawmakers said the proposal improperly elevates two "core factors," worker control and opportunity for profit or loss, over the broader multifactor economic realities test applied by courts.

They also said the rule is overly rigid and downplays other relevant considerations reflecting workers' economic dependence.

"A multifactor approach would ensure that no employee in our communities falls through the cracks, and the proposed rule's intentional deprioritization of other economic reality factors ignores the unique circumstances presented in the rapidly evolving and modernizing workforce," the lawmakers said.

Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.