Soleis V. Laurelbrook Saxon Case Summary

.1. What issues did the court consider in this case? What did the court decide? In the case Solis v. Laurelbrook Sanitarium and School, is disputed whether students are categorized as students or employees of the institution. The school offers students learning in both theory and practice, where students spend four hours in the classroom and four hours doing practical work as part of vocational education (without pay). One of the issues addressed by the court was deciding which test was the proper one to be used in order to determine whether the employment relationship was present in training or learning situation. The primary problem that the court has to consider is to identify whom of the parties between the institution and the students, is the main beneficiary of the students work. The court ruled in this case that students are not employees under the FLSA.

2.

We must remember that the focus of the court is to establish which party is the main beneficiary of the work provided by students.

3. What two tests of employment status were proposed by the parties to this litigation? What test did the court choose? The tests proposed by the parties in the litigation were: the primary benefit test and the application of a six-factor test created by the Wage & Hour Division (WHD) to distinguish between employees and trainees. The primary benefit test considered which party receives the main benefit as a result of the students work. On the other hand, the application of six-factor has the following criteria: (p. 43, case Solis v. Laurelbrook)

• The training is similar to that which would be given in a vocational school.

• The training is for the benefit of the student.

• The trainees don’t displace regular employees.

• The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the