Case Problem:
Douglas Schultz, Anthony Phiniezy, Melissa Lopes, Steven Rowe, and Jared Baker worked as personal protection specialists (PPS agents) for Prince Faisal bin Turki bin Nasser Al-Saud (the Prince), a diplomat and member of the Saudi royal family who had a residence in Virginia. The plaintiffs worked through Capital International Security, Inc. (CIS), which was engaged by the Prince to provide his personal security detail. The agents worked on an hourly basis, based on the Prince’s protection needs, and performed a variety of services, such as sorting mail and vehicle care, as well as their main duty of protecting the Prince and his family. CIS and the Prince provided all of the agents’ equipment and weapons, unless the agents owned and wished to use their own handguns. Toward the end of their employment, Sammy Hebri, the founder of CIS, instructed all of the agents to get private security licenses and personal liability insurance so that they could be classified as independent contractors. None of the agents obtained private security licenses or liability insurance. Shultz, Phiniezy, Lopes, Rowe, and Baker filed an action against CIS and Hebri, claiming unpaid overtime. CIS and Hebri argued that the agents were independent contractors and therefore were not covered by the FLSA. The agents argued that they were employees because they lacked the control over their duties and hours that an independent contractor would have and therefore were entitled to overtime compensation. The district court found for Hebri and CIS. The agents appealed. How do you think the appeals court ruled, and why?
Your answer must be, typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), one-inch margins on all sides, APA format and also include references.