Who Is Liable When a Staffing Agency Worker Is Injured in Georgia?
On this page
Workers’ compensation pays, and when those benefits are provided, neither the staffing agency nor the client business can be sued in tort. O.C.G.A. § 34-9-11(c) extends the employer’s tort immunity to “the businesses using the services of a temporary help contracting firm” or an employee leasing company, as long as workers’ compensation benefits are provided by the agency, the leasing company, or the client. A tort claim remains available against third parties who are neither.
The statute that decides staffing cases
Section 34-9-11(c) says:
- the exclusive-remedy immunity “shall apply and extend to the businesses using the services of a temporary help contracting firm … or an employee leasing company … when the benefits required by this chapter are provided by either the temporary help contracting firm or the employee leasing company or the business using the services of either such firm or company”; and
- “a temporary help contracting firm or an employee leasing company shall be deemed to be a statutory employer for the purposes of this chapter”.
Two consequences follow. The client’s immunity does not depend on whether it controlled the worker’s daily tasks; it depends on benefits being provided by one of the three. And the staffing firm itself is treated as an employer, so it shares the immunity.
Why the staffing statute comes before the borrowed-servant test
Outside the staffing statute, whether a worker lent by one employer to another is the borrowing employer’s “borrowed servant” turns on a three-part test: the special employer “had complete control and direction of the servant for the occasion”, the general employer “had no such control”, and the special employer “had the exclusive right to discharge the servant” (Aimwell, Inc. v. McLendon Enterprises, Inc., 2012, stating the test). That test is explained in the borrowed servant doctrine. For a placement through a temporary help firm or employee leasing company, § 34-9-11(c) provides immunity without that control analysis.
Who can still be sued
The exclusive remedy statute preserves claims “against any third-party tort-feasor”, with listed exceptions (§ 34-9-11(a)):
| Possible defendant | Tort claim? |
|---|---|
| The staffing firm | No; it is a statutory employer (§ 34-9-11(c)) |
| The client business using the worker | No, when workers' compensation benefits are provided by the firm, leasing company, or client (§ 34-9-11(c)) |
| A co-employee of the same employer | No (§ 34-9-11(a)) |
| A manufacturer of defective equipment the worker used | Yes, as a third party |
| A driver of another vehicle, a property owner, or a contractor not in the employment chain | Yes, as a third party |
Third-party claims, and how the workers’ compensation insurer recovers from them, are covered in whether you can sue for a workplace injury or only get workers’ comp.
Which employer pays the benefits
The statute’s immunity works if any of the three provides the benefits. When more than one business could be the employer, the State Board of Workers’ Compensation decides responsibility; in Aimwell, the administrative law judge awarded benefits against both the worker’s employer and its customer in equal parts, and that award was appealed. A staffing worker’s claim is filed through the workers’ compensation system, not a lawsuit, whoever ultimately pays.
Questions to answer for a staffing worker
- Which company issued the paycheck, and is it a temporary help firm or employee leasing company?
- Who carried the workers’ compensation insurance, and has it paid?
- Did any equipment, vehicle, or property owner outside the staffing relationship contribute to the injury?
- Was the person who caused the injury a co-worker, a client employee, or an outsider?
Sources
- O.C.G.A. §§ 34-9-11, 34-8-32, 34-8-46.
- Aimwell, Inc. v. McLendon Enterprises, Inc., 318 Ga. App. 394 (2012)
General information about Georgia law as of October 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.