The company controlled the worker's hours, tools, and supervision – and that changed everything
A Tennessee appeals court has ruled that a staffing contract cannot override the reality of who actually controls a temp worker's job.
In a decision filed on April 29, 2026, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee at Jackson affirmed summary judgment in favor of Dayco Incorporated, finding that a temporary worker assigned to the company through a staffing agency was, in the eyes of the law, a co-employee of Dayco – despite a contract that said the opposite.
The case began with a workplace injury. Keith King was employed by Pro-Man Staffing Solutions and assigned to work at Dayco's facility as a forklift operator. On June 14, 2023, King drove a forklift over plywood and the vehicle fell through. He was injured and later filed a negligence lawsuit against Dayco in the Shelby County Circuit Court, seeking $150,000 in compensatory damages.
King's central argument relied on the staffing agreement between Pro-Man and Dayco, which stated plainly that no employer-employee relationship existed between Dayco and any contract employee. On paper, King worked for Pro-Man. In practice, the arrangement looked very different.
The undisputed record showed that Dayco controlled the details of King's work. A full-time Dayco employee, Lamonda Topps, served as his supervisor. He also reported to Dayco manager Derek Spates. Each day, either Topps or King's lead, Dana Hubbard, assigned him specific trailers to inspect and remove containers from using the forklift. King was required to report to work Monday through Friday, 6 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., and clock in and out on a daily basis. He was expected to work a minimum of 40 hours a week. Dayco provided all necessary tools and equipment. King had no authority to hire any of his own workers or helpers. When he was absent, Hubbard was required to assume his duties. During his first week, Topps personally instructed Hubbard to train King and observed the training.
King did not respond to any of these facts when Dayco submitted them during the summary judgment proceedings. Under Tennessee procedural rules, that silence meant the facts could be deemed admitted. King also conceded in his own appellate brief that four of the seven statutory factors used to determine employee status appeared satisfied.
The court applied what Tennessee calls the loaned servant doctrine – a legal principle under which a worker can be treated as an employee of both the staffing agency and the client company, provided three conditions are met: there is an implied agreement to work for the client, the work being done is essentially the client's work, and the client controls the details of how the work gets done. All three were satisfied here.
Tennessee law has long held that when a temp worker agrees to work for a staffing agency, that worker implicitly consents to work for whichever client the agency assigns them to. That consent, the court explained, creates an implied employment relationship with the client – regardless of what the staffing contract says. The court pointed to decades of consistent rulings reaching the same conclusion.
Because King was deemed a co-employee of both Pro-Man and Dayco, his only avenue for recovery was through workers' compensation – not a negligence lawsuit. The exclusive remedy provision of the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Law barred his claim. King had, in fact, already filed a successful workers' compensation claim against Pro-Man.
The ruling carries a straightforward message for employers who rely on temporary staffing arrangements. The language in a staffing agreement – no matter how clearly it disclaims an employer-employee relationship – will not hold up if the company on the ground is the one directing, supervising, scheduling, equipping, and training the worker. Courts in Tennessee will look past the contract and examine the actual working conditions.
For HR teams managing contingent workforces, this case is a reminder that operational control comes with legal consequences, and no clause in a vendor agreement can change that.
