4 ms·
NOPE! That could imply that they are employees and we all know that's impossible ;)
by amazing_jose 11y ago
NOPE! That could imply that they are employees and we all know that's impossible ;)
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y agoOh right, I forgot that they're skirting employment law.
- run4yourlives2 11y agoThe funny thing is that this wouldn't fly in Canada, (and I'm assuming other jurisdictions, like California), since even the inference of an employer/employee relationship constitutes one when it comes to legal entitlements and responsibilities.