Chapter 5

Vicarious Liability Liability Negligent hiring (p. 86) (p. 96) Negligent supervision (p. 87) (p. 97) Negligent retention (p. 88) (p. 97) Negligent selection (p. 92) (p. 97) Liability of independent contractor Ratification/condonation principle Factors used to determine Independent contractor status Liability for acts of volunteer (p. 94) (97)

Vicarious liability: Respondeat superior (let the master respond).Employee actions must be within “scope of employment.”Consider Smith v. Gardner

Negligent Hiring Negligent

Supervision

Negligent Retention

Negligent Selection

The question is whether a manager acted reasonable in choosing a particular person to fill a position.

Is there a risk created by exposing members of the public to a dangerous or unfit person.

Read p. 86 and consider a possible problem.

The question is whether a manager acted reasonably in guiding and overseeing an employee’s action.

Consider: Read 87 for

example

The question is whether a manager acted reasonably in retaining an employee’s services.

Consider: read p.88

The employer has a duty to choose an independent contractor in a reasonable fashion; similar to negligent hiring.

Consider: Lang v. Silva

Exception to general rule of nonliability for actions of independent contractors.

Elements of negligence apply if employer fails to use due care when choosing an independent contractor.

Employer avoids the prospect of vicarious liability based on the independent contractor’s actions.

Degree of control is critical.

Independent contractor status is determined by variety of factors.

• Develop and follow protocols for hiring employees, even when a candidate is known.

• Include protocols for reasonable investigation into applicants’ backgrounds.

• Check references thoroughly.

• Train managers to supervise and discipline employees appropriately.

• Develop a no-tolerance policy regarding workplace violence and inappropriate behavior, and train employees to resolve disputes.

Volunteer: Assists organization in some capacity for no compensation.

Liability of a volunteer’s acts depends on level of control exerted over his/her actions, not on unpaid status.Consider:Lasseigne v. American Legion Nicholson Post

#38

Athletes are not agents of the university, nor are they employees.

Courts typically hold that the relationship between university and its athletes is not one of employer-employee.

Vicarious liability should not be imposed on a university for actions of its athletes.

Consider: Kavanagh v. Trustees of

Boston University

Independent contractors: Develop a list of necessary credentials for

independent contractors, and hire only those who meet the criteria.

Require a list of references, and check them carefully.

Volunteers: Screen and select volunteers with the same care

that you use for employees in the same capacities. Use particular care when screening volunteers who

will be in positions of authority and trust with minors.

1. Scope of employment means that an employee is acting to advance the business of the employer. T/F

2. An organization can never be vicariously liable for the acts of a volunteer. T/F

3. Negligent hiring occurs when an employer breaches its duty to hire safe and competent employees. T/F

4 Most courts have consistently held that the relationship between a university and its athletes is one of

a. Employer-employee

b. Not employer-employee

c. Principal-agent

d. No relationship exists

5. An organization may be vicariously liable for the actions of a volunteer if:

a. The volunteer is being partially compensated

b. The volunteer is also an athlete

c. The organization exerts day-to-day control over the volunteer

d. The organization is never liable for the actions of a volunteer

1. Scope of employment means that an employee is acting to advance the business of the employer. _________A

2. An organization can never be vicariously liable for the acts of a volunteer. __________B

3. Negligent hiring occurs when an employer breaches its duty to hire safe and competent employees. ______________A

4 Most courts have consistently held that the relationship between a university and its athletes is one of

a. Employer-employee b. Not employer-employee c. Principal-agent d. No relationship exists_________ B 5. An organization may be vicariously liable for the actions of a volunteer if:

a. The volunteer is being partially compensated b. The volunteer is also an athlete c. The organization exerts day-to-day control over the volunteer d. The organization is never liable for the actions of a volunteer___________C