PARTIES; DEFINITIONS; WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE? (SEE 502 AND 1309) – Students

Single Topic for Decision 1359H

View all topics for Decision 1359H

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

In determining that the housestaff are entitled to HEERA coverage, the Board applied the following three-part HEERA section 3562 (f) test : Part One: Is employment contingent on student status? Part Two: Are the services provided by housestaff related to their educational objectives? Part Three - Prong One: Are the educational objectives of housestaff subordinate to the services they perform? Part Three - Prong Two: Would coverage of housestaff under HEERA further the purposes of the Act?; pp. 17-20. The Board determined that employment in housestaff positions is more valuable and effective in providing service to the University than in meeting the educational objectives of housestaff; The Board found the indicia of employment persuasive in determining that housestaff are employees, i.e., their compensation level is substantial, up to $45,000 per year; they work on a 12-month, non-academic schedule and receive a 4-week paid vacation per year; they receive an extensive benefit package, including medical and dental coverage, disability and life insurance and fully paid medical malpractice insurance; and they receive performance appraisals on which promotions and salary increases may be based. Conversely, housestaff do not exhibit several fundamental indicia of student status. They pay no University tuition; they take no University examinations; and they receive no grades; p. 19. The Board determined that HEERA coverage of housestaff would further the purposes of the Act; p. 23. The Board adopted the ALJ's finding that housestaff on rotation at non-University owned and operated facilities are not employees under subsection (f) and, therefore, are excluded from HEERA coverage; p.15.