Misclassified? Amazon Flex Under the Microscope in All 50 States
State laws may disagree with Amazon’s definition of ‘independent contractor’
Determining whether Amazon Flex drivers are independent contractors or employees is a complex issue, as it depends heavily on the specific state laws and the nuances of Amazon's operational control. This is a highly litigated area, and court decisions are constantly evolving.
Generally, states use variations of tests to determine worker classification, often drawing from common law, the IRS's 20-factor test (though less commonly used now), the "economic realities" test (favored by federal agencies like the DOL), or the "ABC test" (used by a growing number of states).
Here's an analysis of how Amazon Flex might fare against common criteria, acknowledging that actual legal determination requires detailed fact-finding and current legal precedent in each state.
Key Challenges for Amazon Flex's Independent Contractor Classification:
Amazon Flex's model often faces scrutiny because:
Control: Amazon exerts significant control over many aspects of the work, including delivery routes, timing, and performance metrics. While drivers "choose" blocks, they operate within Amazon's highly structured system.
Integral to Business: Package delivery is core to Amazon's business, making it harder to argue that drivers are performing work "outside the usual course of business."
Lack of Independent Business: Many drivers do not operate truly independent delivery businesses with other clients, significant capital investment, or genuine opportunities for profit/loss beyond Amazon's rates.
Alabama
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Ala. Code §25-4-19)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/alabama/2017/title25/chapter4/section25-4-19/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; financial dependence; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Alaska
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Alaska Stat. §23.20.155)
Citation: https://www.akleg.gov/basis/statutes.asp#23.20.155
State-Specific Criteria: Direction/control; economic dependency; permanency
Analysis: Likely Employee
Arizona
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Ariz. Rev. Stat. §23-501)
Citation: https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=http://www.azleg.gov/ars/23/00501.htm
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral, financial, relational control; profit/loss
Analysis: Likely Employee
Arkansas
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Ark. Code Ann. §11-10-213)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/arkansas/2014/title-11/subtitle-2/chapter-10/subchapter-2/section-11-10-213/
State-Specific Criteria: Control over conduct; profit/loss potential; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
California
Test & Law: ABC-test (Dynamex/AB 5 – Cal. Lab. Code §2750.3)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2019/code-lab/division-3/chapter-2/article-1/section-2750.3/
State-Specific Criteria: Free from control; outside usual business; independent trade
Analysis: Employee
Colorado
Test & Law: Common-law (Wage & Hour – Colo. Rev. Stat. §8-70-115)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2016/title-8/department-of-labor-and-employment/article-70/part-1/section-8-70-115/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; economic dependence; permanence
Analysis: Likely Employee
Connecticut
Test & Law: ABC-test (Conn. Gen. Stat. §31-3a)
Citation: https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_567.htm#sec_31-3a
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
Delaware
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – 19 Del. C. §3311)
Citation: https://delcode.delaware.gov/title19/c033/index.html
State-Specific Criteria: Control; financial dependence; relationship duration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Florida
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Comp. – Fla. Stat. §443.036)
Citation: https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2020/443.036
State-Specific Criteria: Control; profit/loss; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Georgia
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Ga. Code §34-8-190)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2020/title-34/chapter-8/section-34-8-190/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Hawaii
Test & Law: ABC-test (Unemp. Ins. – Haw. Rev. Stat. §387-1)
Citation: https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol07_Ch0346-0398/HRS0387/HRS_0387-0001.htm
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
Idaho
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Idaho Code §72-1316A)
Citation: https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/Title72/T72CH13/SECT72-1316A/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Illinois
Test & Law: ABC-test (Ill. Wage Payment & Collection Act – 820 ILCS 115/2)
Citation: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2403&ChapterID=68
State-Specific Criteria: No supervision; outside usual business; independent trade
Analysis: Employee
Indiana
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Ind. Code §22-4-1-3)
Citation: https://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2020/ic/titles/022#22-4-1-3
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; profit/loss; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Iowa
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Iowa Code §96.19)
Citation: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/96.19.pdf
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Kansas
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Kan. Stat. §44-503)
Citation: http://ksrevisor.org/statutes/chapters/ch44/044_005_0003.html
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; economic dependency
Analysis: Likely Employee
Kentucky
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Ky. Rev. Stat. §341.010)
Citation: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=43951
State-Specific Criteria: Control; dependence; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Louisiana
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – La. Rev. Stat. §23:1472)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2011/rs/title-23/rs23-1472/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; economic dependence; permanence
Analysis: Likely Employee
Maine
Test & Law: ABC-test (Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 26 §1043)
Citation: https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec1043.html
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
Maryland
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Md. Lab. & Empl. Code §8-402)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2016/lexi/constantine/article-gse/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Massachusetts
Test & Law: ABC-test (M.G.L. c. 149 §148B)
Citation: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXXI/Chapter149/Section148B
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
Michigan
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Mich. Comp. Laws §408.972)
Citation: https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(ak45dy5fhif3ael4d5czsxvi))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-408-972
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; profit/loss; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Minnesota
Test & Law: Common-law (Unemp. Ins. – Minn. Stat. §181.723)
Citation: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/181.723
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control; permanence
Analysis: Likely Employee
Mississippi
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Miss. Code §71-5-1)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/mississippi/2010/title-71/chapter-5/section-71-5-1/
State-Specific Criteria: Control; economic dependency; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Missouri
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Mo. Rev. Stat. §288.019)
Citation: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=288.019
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral, financial, relational control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Montana
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Mont. Code §39-51-205)
Citation: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0390/chapter_0510/parts_index.html
State-Specific Criteria: Control; economic dependence; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Nebraska
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Neb. Rev. Stat. §48-625)
Citation: https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=48-625
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Nevada
Test & Law: NRS 608.0155 – presumption of independent contractor
Citation: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-608.html#NRS608Sec0155
State-Specific Criteria: EIN/SSN; licenses; ≥3 of 5 prongs (control, hours, exclusivity, help, investment)
Analysis: Likely Employee in practice
New Hampshire
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – N.H. Rev. Stat. §282-A:2)
Citation: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXII/282-A/282-A-2.htm
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
New Jersey
Test & Law: ABC-test (Hargrove v. Sleepy’s, LLC, 106 A.3d 449 (N.J. 2015))
Citation: https://casetext.com/case/hargrove-v-sleepys-llc-3
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
New Mexico
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – N.M. Stat. §51-1-1)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2020/chapter-51/article-1/section-51-1-1/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control; dependency
Analysis: Likely Employee
New York
Test & Law: ABC-test (Dynamex – NY Lab. Law §860)
Citation: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/LAB/860
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
North Carolina
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – N.C. Gen. Stat. §96-8)
Citation: https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_96/GS_96-8.html
State-Specific Criteria: Control; dependency; permanence
Analysis: Likely Employee
North Dakota
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – N.D. Cent. Code §52-02.1-02)
Citation: https://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t52c02-1.pdf
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Ohio
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Ohio Rev. Code §4141.01)
Citation: https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-4141.01
State-Specific Criteria: Control; profit/loss; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Oklahoma
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Okla. Stat. tit. 40 §160)
Citation: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=72552
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Oregon
Test & Law: ABC-test (Or. Rev. Stat. §653.305)
Citation: https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_653.305
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
Pennsylvania
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – 43 Pa. Stat. §755)
Citation: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/Legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=43&div=1&chpt=7&sctn=755
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral, financial, relational control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Rhode Island
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – R.I. Gen. Laws §28-41-2)
Citation: http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/title28/28-41/28-41-2.HTM
State-Specific Criteria: Control; integration; dependency
Analysis: Likely Employee
South Carolina
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – S.C. Code §41-1-30)
Citation: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t41c001.php
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
South Dakota
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – S.D. Codified Laws §61-6-10.1)
Citation: https://sdlegislature.gov/Statutes/Codified_Laws/2040080
State-Specific Criteria: Control; economic dependence
Analysis: Likely Employee
Tennessee
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Tenn. Code §50-7-102)
Citation: https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2020/title-50/chapter-7/part-1/section-50-7-102/
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Texas
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Tex. Labor Code §201.021)
Citation: https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/LA/htm/LA.201.htm#201.021
State-Specific Criteria: Control; financial risk; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Utah
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Utah Code §35A-4-305)
Citation: https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title35A/Chapter4/35A-4-S305.html
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral & financial control
Analysis: Likely Employee
Vermont
Test & Law: ABC-test (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21 §§601–603)
Citation: https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/21/005/00601
State-Specific Criteria: Strict A, B, C prongs
Analysis: Employee
Virginia
Test & Law: Presumption (Va. Code §40.1-28.7:7)
Citation: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title40.1/chapter3/section40.1-28.7:7/
State-Specific Criteria: IRS factors; misclassification penalties
Analysis: Employee
Washington
Test & Law: Gig-law (RCW 49.46.300–330; ESHB 2076, 2022)
Citation: https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=49.46.300
State-Specific Criteria: Contractor status; min pay; deactivation appeal; sick leave
Analysis: Contractor with protections
West Virginia
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – W. Va. Code §21A-6-1 et seq.)
Citation: https://code.wvlegislature.gov/21A-6-1/
State-Specific Criteria: Control; dependency; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Wisconsin
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Wis. Stat. §103.855; WI Supreme Court)
Citation: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/103/III/855
State-Specific Criteria: Control; economic dependence; company rules
Analysis: Employee
Wyoming
Test & Law: Common-law (UI – Wyo. Stat. §27-3-102)
Citation: https://wyoleg.gov/Statutes/compress/title27.pdf
State-Specific Criteria: Behavioral control; financial dependence; integration
Analysis: Likely Employee
Disclaimer: This article is intended for informational and journalistic purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The author is not an attorney. If you are an Amazon Flex driver and believe your classification or pay violates state or federal law, you should consult a qualified attorney or contact the Nevada Labor Commissioner directly.