About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


93 Wash. L. Rev. Online 1 (2018)

handle is hein.journals/wlro93 and id is 1 raw text is: DEFINING ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE FOR THE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: A CASE FOR THE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT DOCTRINE IN WASHINGTON Benjamin J. Robbins* Abstract: Corporations increasingly rely on independent contractors to fulfill basic organizational needs. This increased reliance has created a number of legal issues, one of which is the level of privilege extended to communications between contractors and legal counsel for the contracting corporation This issue is particularly relevant for corporations in the gig economy, like Uber, Lyft, and Postmates, which rely on independent contractors for fundamental business functions. Washington State courts have yet to decide whether independent contractors are entitled to attorney-client privilege regarding these conversations. Generally, Washington courts follow the U.S. Supreme Court's Upjohn rule, which protects communications between corporate counsel and non-executive employees in certain, somewhat vague situations. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and Colorado Supreme Court have adopted a practical legal test to address this issue, entitling a corporation's independent contractors to privilege with the corporation's counsel if they are functionally equivalent to or indistinguishable from the corporation's employees. This Comment argues that Washington State courts should adopt the Colorado Supreme Court's extension of the functional equivalent doctrine. Colorado's approach reflects the fluid state of twenty-first century employment relationships, which increasingly deviate from the traditional employer-employee model. INTRODUCTION According to an estimate by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, independent contractors make up more than forty percent of the American workforce.' This is in part due to the dynamic nature of modern industry and evolving working relationships, but it is also financially motivated. Employers, recognizing that traditional employees receive significant legal protections and tax benefits not afforded to independent contractors,2 are increasingly misclassifying employees as * I would like to thank the student editors of the Washington Law Review Online for their flexibility, thoughtfulness, and tireless efforts. 1. U.S. Gov'T ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, CONTINGENT WORKFORCE: SIZE, CHARACTERISTICS, EARNINGS, AND BENEFITS 4 (2015), http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/669766.pdf [http://perma.cc/ C4TT-NVN3] (Applying this broad definition to our analysis of data from the General Social Survey (GSS), we estimate that such contingent workers comprised 35.3 percent of employed workers in 2006 and 40.4 percent in 2010.). 2. See id. at 21-24. 1