Business Law question

As far as I know, depending on the state of course, oral agreements aren't worth spit. On the other hand, the customer is there voluntarily. You clearly aren't forcing them to do the work.
The voluntary part probably eliminates liability but I only know that from cutting my hand badly while working on my sisters' house. I had to pay the bill. I wouldn't assume the same with a business though.
A call to the Dept. of Labor would probably clear that up but you might find the applicable law on line now. Most governments post all that stuff

 

I’m not too sure I really understand the scenario, but a business should know their liability for both employees and patrons... and if applicable... volunteers.

Ask a lawyer... who will probably say there is no valid “oral agreement” in this scenario, oral agreements are not even worth spit despite being legally possible, and a business is potentially liable for anything that happens whether that involves an employee or patron. Gross negligence on one part or the other could make a difference in liability assignment but that would be for a court to decide.

What does the business ‘s insurance have to say... that matters more than trying to decipher labor/liability/contract law, etc.

No matter... this sounds like a bad idea from any perspective. What’s the worst that can happen... someone gets injured, insurance denies the claim, and the business gets sued and loses. Unfortunately the worst case is probably exactly what would happen the first and every time something goes wrong in an informal situation like this.

If nothing ever goes wrong... it’s free labor. But is it worth the risk?

 

implied consent

 

Are you saying that this is a volunteer or just a regular customer who is doing this acts on their own? If it is a volunteer there is paperwork for it (at least here in NY) but they are still basically considered your employee and you are responsible for them. We are even responsible for workers like contractors that are on the premises. If they are just a customer who is doing things like clean up duty and such I would tell them to stop and mind their own business unless they would like to fill out a job application because I see nothing good coming from this arrangement. The minute they get hurt or do something to a customer the owner is going to be on the hook.

 

What are the details? What state? How long has this been going on?

The intent of every state's worker's compensation law is to favor the injured worker, which typically includes a very broad and liberal definition of what constitutes an "employer/employee" relationship.

Based on what you've described, if the person is injured while performing these activities, I think they would be considered for the purposes of Workers' Comp an employee. Generally speaking, most states define an employer/employee relationship as a) the right to hire and fire - can the owner stop the person at any time? Did they choose not to stop them? They let the activity continue; b) Method and manner of payment - did the owner decide what, if anything, the person would receive in exchange for their services.....free meals, discounted pricing etc. OR c) Direction and control - does the owner have the ability to tell the person what to do, how to do it, when to do it and so on?

Generally speaking, if any one of these elements exists, then, for the purposes of workers' comp, an employer/employee relationship may exist. Again, it depends on the state.

On the other side of the coin, if the person is injured while performing these activities, AND it is determined that an employer/employee relationship does not exist, then, generally speaking, the person could conceivably sue the owner for his/her injuries. There are limitations and thresholds that would otherwise have to be met depending on the state where this happens. Nevertheless, this situation does create at least some measurable risk for the owner.

Not for nuthin, but, why doesn't the owner simply hire the person? That would eliminate a metric sh*t ton of potential issues.

 

Ahhhh, the “regulars” that hang out... the sign of a dead or dying establishment. TheY forget that the restaurant is a business and treat it like their own kitchen... never really paying their way. All the while the proprietor is going broke. Its not just an accident liability concern most of the time... this is as much a business question as a legal question!