(a) The test of coverage for sharecroppers and tenant farmers is the same as that applied under the Act to determine whether any other person is an employee or not. Certain so-called sharecroppers or tenants whose work activities are closely guided by the landowner or his agent are covered. Those individuals called sharecroppers and tenants whose work is closeIy directed and who have no actual discretion in controlling farm operations are in fact employees by another name. True independent-contractor sharecroppers or tenant farmers who actually control their farm operations are not employees, but if they employ other workers they may be responsible as employers under the Act.

(b) In determining whether such individuals are employees or independent contractors, the criteria laid down by the courts in interpreting the Act's definitions of employment, such as those enunciated by the Supreme Court in Rutherford Food Corporation v. McComb, are utilized. This case, as well as others, made it clear that the answer to the question of whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor under the definitions in this Act lies in the relationship in its entirety, and is not determined by common law concepts. It does not depend upon isolated factors but on the “whole activity.” An employee is one who as a matter of economic reality follows the usual path of an employee. Each case must be decided on the basis of all facts and circumstances, and as an aid in the assessment, one considers such factors as the following:

(c) Where a tenant or sharecropper is found to be an employee, he and any members of his family who work with him on the crop are also to be included in the 500 man-day count of the owner or operator of the farm. Thus, where a sharecropper is an employee and his wife and children help in chopping cotton, all the family members are employees of the farm owner or operator and all their man-days of work are counted.

(d) On the other hand, a sharecropper or tenant who qualifies as a bona fide independent contractor is considered the same as any other employer, and only the man-days of agricultural labor performed by employees of such a sharecropper or tenant are counted toward the man-days used by him. If he does not meet the 500 man-day test, he is not required to pay his employees the minimum wage even though those employees are entitled to the minimum wage when working for a separate employer who met the man-day test.