Special Issues in Agreements Involving Outsourcing

The trend towards outsourcing will continue to growrequirements of the project.In particular, the fact
as market pressures force corporations to be morethat a worker is employed by a temporary agency,
tightly focused on core business functions, gainingor similar entity
competitive advantage and reducing costs.is not a guarantee against misclassification under the
Outsourcing is an attractive alternative in good timesjoint employer rule applied by the
and bad times. Shifting back end administrative andNinth Cir. Court in Microsoft III. If a misclassification
business functions to an external provider in gooddoes occur a firm may qualify for
times, may be a means for quicker time to marketan IRS Section 530 "safe harbor" exception if it can
and focusing resources on core business activities toshow the following:1. Reasonable basis for
grow the business. In bad times, outsourcing is aclassification of individuals as ICs based on:- Reliance
means for streamlining the enterprise by eliminatingon a relevant court case, the advice of a qualified
functions, which create a drag on capital and/or doaccountant or attorney,
not provide any competitive advantage.In the currentor IRS ruling;- The IRS did not reclassify the same
economic environment, concerns over, shrinkingor similar workers in a previous audit;- It is standard
margins, liquidity and theindustry practice to treat the particular workers as
need to reduce operating cost structures isICs.2. Consistently treated same or similar workers as
accelerating a trend towards shifting certainICs in the past.3. Consistently filed federal tax forms
back office administrative functions to outside1099 on these same or similar workers.Outsourcing
suppliers. This trend is seen as a majorany critical business function and especially one like
paradigm shift within enterprises, which haveHR must be carefully
realigned their internal corporateplanned and executed to be an economic and
infrastructure to focus on more strategic areas ofstrategic success. HR operations require
their core business.Although the human resourcestrained and specialized personnel to handle complex
(HR) function is viewed as critical within corporations,processes and manage the
increasingly, small, medium and even largecompliance responsibilities created under the myriad
corporations are moving to outsource thisof federal and state employment
service.The case for outsourcing has three basicregulations. Outsourcing of this function carries the
rationales. First the regulatoryrisk of losing qualified personnel and
compliance obligations imposed under ERISA, COBRAa degradation of the function. A firm can ill afford
and IRS regulations, havethe risk of entering into a relationship
become extremely burdensome and expensive forwith a vendor whose lack of expertise in payroll and
companies. Consequently, avoidingbenefit administration causes
major legal problems and financial liability requiresdisruptions and a loss of efficiency. This may, in the
substantial investment in resourcesworst case, demoralize the work
and capital in an area outside of the core business offorce and expose the firm to significant legal liability.
most companies. This makesPartial success in this area can
outsourcing a viable option even if it does notmean total failure and the loss of strategic
necessarily result in a cost savings in theinitiative.Contracting of the outsource service is a
near term. Second, the need to upgrade HRprocess which requires inputs from all of the
systems and invest in new technology isstakeholders (HR personnel, users of the service,
increasingly difficult when companies are hardand the management team) and those
pressed to invest in functions aligned withpersons within or outside of the organization with
the core competency of the enterprise. HRexpertise in the function. Before talks
outsourcing service providers are betterare ever initiated with a vendor, the key goal is to
positioned to invest in new technologies anddefine the scope of the service and the
software more likely to conform to "bestperformance metrics, which will be applied to
practices" for delivery of the service. Third, formeasure success. The use of metrics will
companies with global operations,be covered in greater detail below in respect to
employee self-service can substantially reduce costsService Level Agreements (SLAs).Important to both
and improve employee satisfactionparties in the transaction, is defining the kind of
with the service. However, this requires integrationrelationship, which
of all processes- HRIS, payroll andmust be established for the arrangement to
benefits administration- across the entire HRsucceed. If the entire HR Dept function is to
operation including its global ones.Because of thebe outsourced then it will be in the interest of both
business exigencies driving the shift towards HRparties to enter into a long-term
outsourcing, the industryrelationship that will justify the up-front costs and
is expected to grow to $37.7 Billion in 2003.investments that will be required of
Currently HR outsourcing services fall primarily withineach of them. This type of arrangement as
three categories: Professionalpreviously mentioned is subject to the firms
Employer Organization (PEO), Business Processingparticular circumstances, and will probably result in
Outsourcing (BPO) and Applicationselecting either the BPO or PEO
Service Providers (ASPs).4alternative because of the broad scope of the
PEOs assume and take full responsibility for theoutsourced service. For the buyer this type
human resources administration,of wholesale delegation is expensive, complex and
including the legal liability for the company's workers.risky. If it doesn't work out, the
It becomes in essence a coemployerbuyers will incur significant costs and, disruption to
with final say over, hiring, firing, and compensationthe business in replacing the vendor
decisions. The PEOor in bringing the function back in-house.Typically,
becomes a partner, in the non-legal sense, withtotal outsourcing of a function is a major undertaking
ownership of the HR function while thewith broad implications
company retains responsibility over all businessfor both the buyer and vendor. In this situation the
matters.BPO refers to all business processes and notpreferred relationship is one that is
just HR. Typically this involves transferringmore of a partnership, in the non-legal sense, where
the entire function to a service provider and isthe parties view their interests as
differentiated from PEOs because itmutually benefited by the relationship.On the other
usually involves introducing new technologies andend of the continuum is the outsourcing of
processes to bear in the HR service.processes, like payroll, which is
Because of the complexity of HR systems in largevery specific and straightforward and can be
corporations, shifting to BPO may beexecuted on a short-term basis.
more expensive in the short term. However, longNormally, in the HR area, firms will retain part of the
term it can result in benefits becausefunction in-house, and delegate
large HR outsource providers will invest in systemsthose functions to an ASP or BPO, which require
and technology viewed asmajor investments in technology or
prohibitively expensive within a firm where thissoftware. An outside supplier whose core compency
function lies outside of its core business.The BPOlies within function is better able to
services market is growing rapidly with analystabsorb the costs, based on economies of scale. This
projecting revenues of $128type of arrangement will generally
billion this year and growth to $234 billion byresult in an intermediate term relationship where the
2005.Finally, ASPs host software on the web andparties will have to develop close
rent it to users. The most commonly knowncollaboration but will not have to incur the high costs,
of these packages is "People Soft". The latterand investment of resources
application and other packages are used torequired in a long-term relationship.Partnership
manage payroll, benefits, head count and other HRarrangements require provisions that maximize the
processes.Each of the HR outsourcing servicesflexibility of the vendor in
described has advantages and disadvantages forperforming the service. Typically because such
particular enterprises depending, on the number ofrelationships are appropriate in contracts
employees, affordability of thewith long terms of duration, typically five to seven
service, type of business and the degree to whichyears, and complex service
an enterprise desires to retain control ofarrangements, the approach ought to be less
this function in-house.This paper will briefly cover theprescriptive with respect to the scope and
legal aspects of HR outsourcing and will discuss somelevel of service.
of the most common contract issues faced inIn shorter-term arrangements more typical of
outsourcing relationships, essential itemssupplier/purchaser relationships, contracts
that ought to be considered by the parties and keyneed to be more prescriptive in defining the scope
provisions within outsourcing serviceof the services and the client
agreements.As previously discussed, companiesrequirements.Generally contracts ought to build in
facing pressure to reduce costs or address thesome level of flexibility to allow for changes
personnel shortages due to corporate down sizingin:business circumstances,
have several different outsourcingtechnology
alternatives available to them to delegate back-endand the needs of the buyer.Transfer of Personnel
administrative functions. Typically,and Assets:Outsourcing arrangements may require
the first alternative firms look to before lookingthe transfer of assets and personnel to the vendor.
outside, is to retain control of theDefining the terms covering the transfer of affected
function in-house and reduce employment relatedpersonnel will generally have
costs (taxes, benefits, headcount), byimportant implications for the buyer and its
using contingent staff or (temporary workers) oremployees with respect to employment or
persons classified as "independentemployment rights. When wholesale outsourcing of
contractors" (IC) to perform the work. Though thisgroups or functions occur, it is
may be an appealing solution forimportant for firms to take measures to preserve
many firms, given the legal and economic benefits,the general morale, of those remaining
improper classification of someone asand communicate openly and honestly with those
an IC, consultant or temporary worker, who is laterpersons transferred under the
deemed an "employee" carriesoutsourcing agreement. Contract terms need to
serious financial risks.Friction has developed betweenaddress how the outsourcing of the
the growing use of contract workers in lieu of fullfunction and subsequent transfer will affect benefits,
timepensions and pay of personnel
employees and, the public policy aims of providingmoved to the service provider. Consideration should
workers with protections underalso be given to the rights, if any,
federal labor laws to take the Employmentthe transferring firm may have to either enforce
Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA")special terms affecting transferred
and state law employee remedial measures. Inemployees or the right to retain these employees in
addition to the tax risk of an IRS audit, thethe event of contract termination.
risks are higher today that workers will bring claimsWith respect to equipment and other assets, terms
for social security, workman'sgoverning the use by the vendor of any
compensation or other actions challenging theequipment made available to it by the buyer should
misclassification, so that they mayspecify rights of ownership and other
participate in lucrative benefit programs provided bymatters related to the transfer of equipment or
the employer.other items of value.Defining the rights to intellectual
The case that brought these issues to the fore wasproperty (IP) is critical in all outsourcing agreements.
Vizcaino v. Microsoft CorporationTypically the vendor will want to retain rights in any
("Microsoft I") and its progeny of cases. In MicrosoftIP developed by it in the course of
I, plaintiffs, employees designatedthe arrangement. The thought being that it is
as temporary workers or "free lancers", brought anproviding a service and not being paid to
action against the corporation todevelop IP. The buyer on the other hand will want all
recover savings benefits under ERISA and for stockrights to IP developed based on the
option benefits offered through atransfer of proprietary or confidential information to
stock purchase plan, that were available to regularthe vendor and any work product
employees.6 The Court framed thedeveloped in performing the service. This issue will
legal and public policy issues in the opinion's openingusually be resolved through
statement:negotiation.
"Large corporations have increasingly adopted theRelated to this are confidentiality provisions, which
practice of hiring temporary employees orprovide important contractual
independent contractors as a means of avoidingprotections with respect to each party's right's in
payment of employee benefits, and therebyand use of IP in the arrangement.Services
increasing their profits. This practice hasThis is will probably be set out in a schedule and
understandably led to a number of problems, legalnegotiated based on the scope of the
andservices and the functions or processes that will be
otherwise. One of the legal issues that sometimesoutsourced. As stated previously, the
arises is exemplified in this lawsuit. The namednature of the relationship, partnership or supplier
plaintiffs, who were classified by Microsoft aspurchaser will determine how detailed
independent contractors seek to strip that label ofand specific this ought to be.In any event there
its protective covering to obtain for themselvesshould be sufficient clarity and definition for the
certain benefits that the company provided to all ofparties to be able to
its regular or permanent employees."The problemsset mutual expectations and understand the
for Microsoft arose as a result of an IRS tax auditdeliverables that must be produced under the
for tax years 1989 andagreement.
1990. The IRS examined the company's employmentTermination
records to determine if it was inDefining the terms for exiting an arrangement is one
compliance with tax laws. Applying the common-lawof the most critical issues in an
principles defining the employer-employee relationship,outsource agreement. Generally, early termination
the IRS concluded Mircosoft's "freelancers" were notprovisions, which set out rights and
independent contractors but employees forapplicable penalties due in such event, should be a
withholding and tax purposes.matter of last resort except in cases, of
In reaching this conclusion, the IRS applied the testmaterial breach or force majeure.Default provisions
set out under the common law ofshould set out escalation clauses and a reasonable
agency, which requires, in determining if a hiredcure period to
party is an "employee", consideration ofensure the parties have procedures for resolving
the hiring party's right to control the manner anddisputes and issues related to the
means by which the product isperformance of their respective obligations.
accomplished. The IRS applies a 20 factor "controlThere should also be provisions governing the
test" to "assess all of the incidentsmanagement of the exit. These should
of the relationship" with no one factor beinginclude the vendor cooperation in facilitating the
determinative of the employmenttransfer of the service to another vendor
relationship of the parties.9 The US Supreme Courtand the return of any equipment or other items to
reached asimilion conclusion inthe buyer, which were used by vendor
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company vs. Dardenduring the contract.
party not to adopt the IRS factorsConsideration should be given to other provisions,
and, instead applied a twelve factors that itwhich might help to reduce the level
considered. In assessing the relationship ofof disruption to the buyer's operations as a result of
the parties the court decided for determiningthe termination of the agreement.What is a Service
whether an individual qualifies as aLevel Agreement (SLA)?SLAs in an outsourcing
"common law employee".Microsoft, on firstarrangement identify the service levels or
impression, appeared to have taken the appropriateperformance standards
measures to avoidthat the vendor must meet or exceed. The SLA
stumbling into an employer-employee relationship-also specifies consequences for failing to
the workers were told they wereachieve the minimum service level set by the buyer.
freelancers and signed various agreementsSLAs should be applied to the key parts of the
classifying them as independent contractors,outsourced service and not necessarily to
that included provisions that the workers would beevery aspect. The purpose of SLAs is to ensure the
responsible for paying their own taxesbuyer has the means to control the
and benefits. However, after having taken theselevel and the consistency of the service received
steps with respect to the form of thefrom the provider.
relationship, the court found that Microsoft had fullyGenerally, the minimum level that ought to be set is
integrated these workers into itsthat which is required to support the
workforce, placing them alongside regularbuyer's on-going business operations and HR
employees, sharing the same supervisors,requirements. An important rationale for
performing identical functions and working the sameoutsourcing should be to improve the level and
core hours. Because Microsoftquality of the function that is being
required them to work on site, they were givenoutsourced. Therefore the minimum level of service
admittance keys, office equipment andshould be at least equal to the level
supplies of the company.Even after the IRSthat existed before the function was outsourced to
determined that plaintiffs were "common lawthe provider.
employees", MicrosoftIn the HR area metrics are difficult to establish
attempted to use a temporary agency to "house"because much of what is being measured
these workers as employees of theis intangible. For example if buyer wants to
agency, so that it could continue to use them in thedetermine the success of a web based
same manner previously described.application for benefits, this can only be ascertained
On review in Vizcaino v. U.S. Dist. Court for Westernby surveying user satisfaction. As
District of Washington, 173 F.3dsuch questionnaires and employee satisfaction
713 (9th Cir. 1999) ("Microsoft III"), the Court insurveys become essential tools for
striking down the District Court'smeasuring the performance of the vendor.SLAS
modification of the class of plaintiffs, which itmust reflect the agreement understanding of the
deemed a contravention of its order onparties as to what constitutes a
remand, rejected the lower court's assertion thatgood result and with respect to measuring
the eligibility for benefits of theseperformance, their agreement on the
temporary agency workers turned on whether theymechanisms used to measure the result.
were employees of the Company orThe SLA should also cover what constitutes the
the agency. The District Court's view precluded thebest and the worst-case level of service.
possibility that the agency andIn this regard the buyer will want to incorporate
Microsoft could jointly employ the plaintiff. The Courtservice credits, which may become
held that at common law it wasapplicable in the event the vendor fails to meet
possible for the plaintiff's to be employees of bothminimum service levels. At the same time
the temporary agency and of theit is also appropriate to consider incentives or
recipient of their services (Microsoft), if, based on abonuses, which the vendor can receive for
determination using the Dardenachieving the best-case level of service.The point of
factors, an employee-employer relationship existed.any negotiation ought to be that it is in the interest
In essence the agency and Microsoftof both parties that the
were joint employers and the triangular relationshipvendor meet or exceed the service levels set in the
that Microsoft created was notSLA. The buyers should not exploit
viewed as precluding or as being mutually exclusivethe use of SLAs, to reduce costs through the
of a two- party relationship thatapplication of credits or penalties, because
existed between the company and the temporarythis will only inject an unnecessary level of
workers. So what are the lessons gleaned from thecontention into the relationship that will
Microsoft cases?- Review the language in theunder cut the development of a partnership
company's benefit plans to ensure "coveredbetween the parties.
employees" is properly defined within the plan andSLAs should not have a distorting effect on
not left to statutory or judicialbehavior, where the vendor becomes focused
interpretation.- The mere classification of workers asonly on those aspects of the service, that are
independent contractors is not sufficient,measured, at the expense of other aspects,
and behavioral, financial and the type of relationshipwhich may not be weighted as heavily in the
between the hiring party andevaluation process. The vendor's goal
the workers must support the classification.- Usersshould be to meet, or exceed expectations in every
of outsourcing services should apply the 20 IRSarea covered by service.Born in Havana, Cuba, Mr.
factors to conduct a selfassessmentRojas immigrated to the United States in 1961 and
of the relationship between the parties.- Considerlived in Ohio and the U.S. Virgin Islands before settling
using only ICs that are incorporated so that thein Florida in 1967. He studied computer programming
relationship is betweenfor three years in a high school "magnet" program
entities and not an individual and an entity.- Ensureand earned his B.A. in English and Philosophy from the
that the agreement reflects the 20 factors, so forUniversity of Florida in 1978, with honors in Philosophy.
example: allow the IC toMr. Rojas then attended law school at the University
determine the means and the methods for delivery,of Miami where he received his J.D., with honors, in
limit the agreement to the1981. In law school, Mr. Rojas was an Articles and
project, and ensure the contract calls for the IC toComments Editor of the school's International Law
cover its expenses and benefits.- Require that the ICReview and served as a member of the Moot Court
submit an invoice prior to receiving any payments.-Board.Mr. Rojas holds the highest ratings assigned by
Avoid placing IC in situations where work is subjectMartindale-Hubbell, and he is listed in several "Who's
to the direct supervision of aWho" publications including Marquis' Who's Who in
company employee.- Avoid imposing administrativeAmerican Law, Who's Who In Florida's Latin
requirements on the IC, which are applicable toCommunity, Who's Who In Intellectual Property, and
employees.- Allow the IC to hire and delegate theWho's Who in International E-Commerce. He is fluent
work to its employees subject to thein Spanish.