Whether the district court's finding that a worker is an employee under the common-law test should be reviewed for clear error, hybrid standard, or de novo

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Like many federal statutes, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 incorporates the traditional common-law test for distinguishing between employees (who are covered by the Act) and independent contractors (who are not). This case presents two questions about that important and oft-litigated test, both of which have divided the courts of appeals: 1. Whether a district court’s finding that a worker is an employee under the common-law test should be reviewed for clear error, as the Fourth, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits hold; using a hybrid standard, as the Second and Eighth Circuits hold; or de novo, as the Sixth Circuit held here. 2. Whether the same traditional inquiry governs under all the statutes that incorporate the commonlaw test for employee status, as several circuits hold, or whether courts may modify the test based on the purpose of each statute, as the Sixth Circuit held here.