| B.C.D. 05-20 |
| May 17 , 2005 |
EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION
CC |
This is
the decision of the Railroad Retirement Board
regarding whether the services performed by CC for
CSX Transportation constituted employee service
under the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231
et seq.(RRA) and the Railroad Unemployment
Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. § 351 et seq.)(RUIA).
CSXT is a covered employer under those Acts.
CC is a retired CSXT employee with an annuity
beginning date of September 1, 2003. He stated
that he provided services to CSXT as a contractor
from September 1, 2001, through December 31, 2001.
He “assisted in the transition of work in the
Automotive Services Group in areas including, but
not limited to[,] monitoring performance of
contractors, providing support in customer
meetings, cross-training group employees and other
transition assistance as needed.” He worked in
CSXT’s general office building. He stated that his
work as a contractor was the same as his work as
an employee, as he “was training a new director
for [his] position.” He worked “in the same
department, at the same work location, for the
same manager” and “the work was the same * * *.”
He was not required to follow a set work schedule;
however, he worked full time. He worked alongside
CSXT employees. CSXT provided office space,
telephone, office supplies, and furniture. He
earned $23,195.00 in 2001 as a contractor from
CSXT.
Information supplied by CSXT indicates that CC
worked for CSXT from September 1, 2001, through
December 31, 2001, and from August 1 to August 15,
2002, to “transition cross training and
restructuring the Automotive Service Group’s
Customer Service roles and responsibilities. * * *
[He] monitored performance of contractors,
provided support in customer meetings and other
transition assistance as needed.” “CC’s
responsibilities in 2001, immediately following
retirement were similar to his previous job
responsibilities, but encompassed reorganization
recommendations resulting from attrition. However,
his responsibilities in 2002 were diminished and
did not include any management responsibilities[,]
focusing exclusively as a customer service
interface.”
CC worked on CSXT premises and his “work
assignments and direction principally came from
Bill Braman – A.V.P. Automotive Customer Service &
Operations whom he was accountable to * * *. CC
used CSXT office equipment.
Section 1(b) of the Railroad Retirement Act and
section 1(d)(i) of the Railroad Unemployment
Insurance Act both define a covered employee as an
individual in the service of an employer for
compensation.
Section 1(d) of the Railroad Retirement Act
further defines an individual as "in the service
of an employer" when:
(i)(A) he is subject to the continuing authority
of the employer to supervise and direct the manner
of rendition of his service, or (B) he is
rendering professional or technical services and
is integrated into the staff of the employer, or
(C) he is rendering, on the property used in the
employer's operations, personal services the
rendition of which is integrated into the
employer's operations; and
(ii) he renders such service for compensation * *
*.
Section 1(e) of the Railroad Unemployment
Insurance Act contains a definition of service
substantially identical to the above, as do
sections 3231(b) and 3231(d) of the Railroad
Retirement Tax Act (26 U.S.C. §§ 3231(b) and (d)).
While the regulations of the Board generally
merely restate this provision, it should be noted
that section 203.3(b) thereof (20 CFR 203.3(b))
provides that the foregoing criteria apply
irrespective of whether "the service is performed
on a part-time basis * * *."
From September 1 through December 31, 2001, CC
performed duties similar to those he performed as
an employee and was supervised in the performance
of these services. Therefore, the Board finds that
the service CC performed for CSXT for the period
September 1 through December 31, 2001, constituted
employee service under sections 1(d)(i)(A) and (c)
of the RRA and the corresponding provisions of the
RUIA. When CC returned to work for a short time in
August 2002, his duties were diminished and it
appears that he worked in the capacity of a
consultant for the two-week period. The Board is
not able to find that his performance of service
during this period of time in August 2002
constituted employee service.
|
| Michael
S. Schwartz |
 |
| V.
M. Speakman, Jr. |
 |
| Jerome
F. Kever |
 |
|
|
