Everyone is trying to get anyone that works for them classified as independent contractors to get around increasing social obligations. End result is there ends up being no distinction, so all contractors get classified as employees. Surely the focus should be to maintain the exception enjoyed by independent contractors by helping to clearly define the distinction, not insisting that we should scrap the distinction?
Lisa
12 Mar 2020 - 11:19 am
Social obligations? What “social obligations”? The problem is the distinction is not supposed to be made by a third party – period.
Mike
13 Mar 2020 - 6:12 am
Is this the best way to champion the cause of the independent contractor, framing the problem in terms of an assertion that nothing is owed to the community? The same community in a democracy that one needs to get on your side to change legislation in your favor? In our democratic process corporations do not have a vote, only real people, thus giving the total number of votes in an isolated employer / contractor relationship (that can change the rules) of one. Good luck with that. The rest of us (using our vote in our own self-interest) will cast it for the side that recognizes the value that we provide as a community in making your business viable.
Mike
13 Mar 2020 - 6:20 am
As an aside, I presume the use of the period at the end of a statement is to underscore that truth is on your side and terminate any further discussion? The statement in this case looks a lot more like an opinion and subject to a whole new debate, even further removed from the fate of the independent contractor.
Lisa
3 Apr 2020 - 10:27 am
If you make an argument that isn’t circular or equivocal I’ll respond. Otherwise it’s largely a waste of my time. I have things to do.
5 Comments
Mike
11 Mar 2020 - 12:45 pmEveryone is trying to get anyone that works for them classified as independent contractors to get around increasing social obligations. End result is there ends up being no distinction, so all contractors get classified as employees. Surely the focus should be to maintain the exception enjoyed by independent contractors by helping to clearly define the distinction, not insisting that we should scrap the distinction?
Lisa
12 Mar 2020 - 11:19 amSocial obligations? What “social obligations”? The problem is the distinction is not supposed to be made by a third party – period.
Mike
13 Mar 2020 - 6:12 amIs this the best way to champion the cause of the independent contractor, framing the problem in terms of an assertion that nothing is owed to the community? The same community in a democracy that one needs to get on your side to change legislation in your favor? In our democratic process corporations do not have a vote, only real people, thus giving the total number of votes in an isolated employer / contractor relationship (that can change the rules) of one. Good luck with that. The rest of us (using our vote in our own self-interest) will cast it for the side that recognizes the value that we provide as a community in making your business viable.
Mike
13 Mar 2020 - 6:20 amAs an aside, I presume the use of the period at the end of a statement is to underscore that truth is on your side and terminate any further discussion? The statement in this case looks a lot more like an opinion and subject to a whole new debate, even further removed from the fate of the independent contractor.
Lisa
3 Apr 2020 - 10:27 amIf you make an argument that isn’t circular or equivocal I’ll respond. Otherwise it’s largely a waste of my time. I have things to do.