| Course | BUS 307 Business Law II |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | undergraduate assignment applying agency and employment law |
| Length | About 1,000 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | BS Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BUS 307 Module 3
Agency and Employment Analysis: The Semitractor Contract and the Seasonal Crew
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
BUS 307: Business Law II
Module Three Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
Agency and Employment Analysis: The Semitractor Contract and the Seasonal Crew
Introduction
In September 2025 a Fargo truck dealer sent the business an invoice for $92,000 for a used semitractor that one of its crew foremen had signed for the week before. None of the siblings had approved the purchase. In the same month, the business's accountant raised a question about the eleven seasonal workers who help move hives each spring and fall: they are paid $1.10 per hive moved and treated as independent contractors, but the accountant thought that might be wrong. This paper analyzes both problems.
The Foreman's Authority
The foreman has worked for the business for nine years. He schedules crews, supervises hive moves and buys supplies. The siblings told him he could buy supplies and parts up to $5,000 without asking, and that anything larger needed their approval. Under the Restatement (Third) of Agency, actual authority exists when the agent reasonably believes, from the principal's words or conduct, that the principal wants him to act (American Law Institute, 2006). The siblings' instruction set a $5,000 limit, so the foreman had no actual authority to buy a $92,000 truck, whatever his reasons.
Apparent Authority
Apparent authority is different. It exists when a third party reasonably believes the agent has authority because of something the principal did or allowed, not because of what the agent said. Mallor et al. (2022) stress that the appearance must be traceable to the principal. Here, the foreman bought a $38,000 flatbed trailer from the same dealer in 2023, signing on the business's behalf. The siblings were surprised but paid the invoice without telling the dealer of any limit. From the dealer's point of view, the business had accepted a large equipment purchase signed by this foreman once before. A court could find that this earlier conduct led the dealer reasonably to believe he could buy equipment for the business, which would bind the business to the new contract.
The siblings could argue that a $92,000 truck is so much larger than a trailer that the dealer should have checked, and that a dealer selling to a farm business knows owners usually approve purchases of that size. That argument has some force, but the dealer had a prior course of dealing with the business through this foreman, and the business never told the dealer of the limit after the trailer purchase.
Ratification
The truck was delivered and has been used for two hive moves. Ratification occurs when a principal, knowing the material facts, affirms an unauthorized act, and accepting and using the benefits of a contract is a common form of affirmation. By using the truck after learning of the purchase, the siblings may already have ratified the contract, which would bind them even if apparent authority were not found. If they wanted to reject the contract, they needed to tell the dealer promptly and return the truck.
The Foreman's Duties
An agent owes the principal a duty to act within his actual authority and to obey the principal's instructions. The foreman breached that duty, and if the business suffered a loss, for example by paying more than the truck was worth, it could hold him liable. In practice, the foreman says he bought the truck because one of the business's two tractors failed inspection and the fall hive move was days away, and the price was fair. The siblings are more likely to use the episode to set clear limits than to sue a valued employee.
The Seasonal Workers
The eleven seasonal workers move hives for about ten weeks each spring and fall. The business schedules their shifts, supplies the trucks, forklifts and protective suits, trains them, and directs how hives are loaded. They are paid per hive moved. Under the economic reality approach courts use, the question is whether workers are economically dependent on the business or in business for themselves.
Worker status factors
| Factor | Facts | Points toward |
|---|---|---|
| Control over the work | Business sets shifts, methods and routes | Employee |
| Opportunity for profit or loss | Paid per hive; no investment or business decisions | Employee |
| Investment in equipment | Business supplies trucks, forklifts and suits | Employee |
| Permanence | Same workers return each season | Employee |
| Integral to the business | Moving hives is central to pollination income | Employee |
| Skill and initiative | Skill learned on the job, not used in an independent business | Employee |
Every factor points toward employment. The per-hive pay and the contractor agreement they signed do not change the result.
What Follows From Employee Status
Federal wage law defines agriculture to include raising bees, so the workers are agricultural employees and are generally exempt from overtime pay (U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, 2008). The business used more than 500 worker-days of agricultural labor in a peak quarter, so the minimum wage applies; at their pace, the workers earn well above it, but the business must keep records to show that. The business must also withhold income and payroll taxes, may owe back employment taxes and penalties for past seasons, and must consider workers' compensation coverage, since an employee injured moving hives would have no coverage under a contractor arrangement.
Recommendations
The siblings should confirm in writing to the dealer that they accept the truck contract, which removes uncertainty, and then write to every vendor the business uses stating who may sign for purchases and up to what amount. They should give the foreman a written authority limit and require two signatures for purchases above $10,000. For the workers, they should reclassify them as seasonal employees from the spring season, speak with their accountant about correcting past payroll taxes and arrange workers' compensation coverage.
Conclusion
The business is likely bound to the truck contract, through apparent authority created by its earlier acceptance of the trailer purchase and through ratification by using the truck. Its seasonal workers are employees, not contractors, though federal law exempts them from overtime as agricultural workers. Clear written authority limits and proper classification will prevent both problems from recurring, at modest cost to the business.
References
American Law Institute. (2006). Restatement (third) of agency. Author.
Mallor, J. P., Barnes, A. J., Bowers, L. T., & Langvardt, A. W. (2022). Business law: The ethical, global, and e-commerce environment (18th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division. (2008). Fact sheet #12: Agricultural employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Author.
What the BUS 307 Module 3 instructions ask for
The Module Three assignment in BUS 307 asks you to apply agency and employment law to a business scenario. Typical questions include whether an agent had authority to bind the principal, whether the principal ratified an unauthorized act, what duties the agent owed, and whether workers are employees or independent contractors and what that means for wage, tax and liability purposes. Strong submissions distinguish actual authority from apparent authority, focusing on what the principal communicated to the agent or to the third party, and apply a recognized test for worker status factor by factor. They also explain practical consequences and fixes.
How this BUS 307 Module 3 agency and employment assignment example is built
The paper finds that the foreman lacked actual authority, since the siblings had limited him to purchases under $5,000. It then examines apparent authority: in 2023 he bought a $38,000 trailer from the same Fargo dealer on the business's behalf, and the siblings paid without objection, which a court could treat as a manifestation to the dealer that he could buy equipment. The business is therefore likely bound, and if it keeps and uses the truck it will also have ratified the contract. On the workers, the paper applies the economic reality factors, finds that they are employees, explains that federal wage law treats beekeeping as agriculture with its overtime exemption, and lists the tax and insurance consequences.
Where the BUS 307 Module 3 rubric puts the points
Scoring for this assignment usually covers the analysis of actual and apparent authority, ratification, agent duties, worker classification, consequences and recommendations, along with writing. Strong papers explain that apparent authority comes from the principal's conduct toward the third party, not from what the agent claims, use the specific facts that created the appearance, and apply each factor of the classification test. They know the relevant exemptions accurately. Papers lose credit for confusing actual and apparent authority, for concluding on worker status without factors, for ignoring ratification and for overlooking tax and insurance consequences. Instructors also reward a clear statement of what the business should do next, since agency problems are usually best solved by prevention.
BUS 307 Module 3 help: the mistakes that cost points
Agency questions often go wrong when students rely on what the agent said. Apparent authority depends on what the principal did or allowed that would lead a reasonable third party to believe the agent had authority, such as paying for earlier purchases without objection. Check ratification too: keeping the benefit of a contract usually ratifies it. For worker status, go factor by factor, since the label in an agreement and the method of pay do not decide the question. Finish with practical steps the business can take now. If your scenario includes a written agreement calling someone a contractor, explain why courts look past the label.
Get BUS 307 Module 3 written to your instructions
Share the BUS 307 Module 3 brief and the facts you were given. We test actual and apparent authority, ratification and duties, then classify workers under the right tests and explain the consequences. Two days, roughly; a first paper is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More BUS 307 papers and related BS Business Administration samples
- BUS 307 Module 1 Discussion: Why Three Siblings Should Stop Being a Partnership
- BUS 307 Module 2 Business Entities Assignment: Partnership, LLC or Corporation
- ACC 318 Module 6 Discussion: A Covenant Breach and Where the Debt Goes
- ACC 317 Module 2 Income Statement Assignment: Discontinued Operations and Comprehensive Income
- ACC 430 Module 4 Project One: What Drives Delivery Cost: A Regression
- ACC 201 Module 6 Receivables and Long-Term Assets Short Paper
BUS 307 Module 3 questions, answered
Where can I find a free BUS 307 Module 3 Agency and Employment sample?
This page includes a complete BUS 307 Module 3 analysis of a foreman's unauthorized contract and seasonal workers' status.
What is apparent authority?
Authority a third party reasonably believes an agent has because of the principal's words or conduct toward that third party, which can bind the principal even if the agent lacked actual authority.
What is ratification in agency law?
A principal's approval of an act done without authority, which can be shown by words or by conduct such as accepting the benefits of the contract.
How is an employee distinguished from an independent contractor?
By the economic realities of the relationship, including control over the work, the worker's opportunity for profit or loss, investment in equipment, permanence and whether the work is integral to the business.
Does federal wage law apply to beekeeping workers?
Yes, though the federal wage law defines agriculture to include raising bees, so agricultural workers are generally exempt from overtime, and some small farms are exempt from minimum wage requirements.