4 ms·
Regardless of the common pattern for what is classified as what, people should be as free as possible to enter into any agreement they want. Surely in the vast
by samh 16y ago
Regardless of the common pattern for what is classified as what, people should be as free as possible to enter into any agreement they want.
Surely in the vast majority of cases it's what people agreed was the arrangement that matters. I know tax considerations complicate this.
- tptacek 16y agoMy impression: no, not so much. This case seems like basically every other contractor/employee status dispute, except turned on its head. Normally, the company has tried to reclassify people who are morally employees as "contractors" to avoid the benefits and terms obligations that come with full-time employees. And no, despite what the "agreement" between the parties may have been, you can't simply call someone whose work obligations are structured identically to employees a "contractor"; companies routinely get dinged for trying to do this.