4 ms·

I think that's where the problem lies. A functioning market imposes certain restrictions on participants. A good regulator also adds requirements to ensure fair

I think that's where the problem lies. A functioning market imposes certain restrictions on participants. A good regulator also adds requirements to ensure fairness, access, etc. One requirement (for instance) could be that you need to provide certain kinds of information about the work. Instead of doing this, what's the point of beating around the bush and inventing that one of the marks of employment is a "sometimes-lousy arrangement"? When did that become the defining characteristic of employment, as opposed to simply an unfavorable contract?

sk5t 7y ago
> what's the point of beating around the bush and inventing that one of the marks of employment is a "sometimes-lousy arrangement"? I don't think anyone seeks to apply such a test; the lousiness of the arrangement is incidental. I had attempted to argue that the mere fact that workers knowingly take a questionable or even bad deal does not mean they are contractors. The legal status of employee vs. contractor does not hinge on that.