4 ms·

The more common this becomes the more likely people in the US (where most people are trying to work) take notice and enforce existing labor laws, and push for m

The more common this becomes the more likely people in the US (where most people are trying to work) take notice and enforce existing labor laws, and push for more regulation. I’ve worked with people doing this in the past and they almost certainly are contractors in name only. That is they are essentially full time employees operating as contractors to skirt legal issues.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
askonomm wrote remote worker, not remote employee. A remote worker can be an independent contractor and easily not run afoul of employee/contractor distinctions, especially because a lot of those distinctions have to do with being at a certain place at a certain time, and being locked to one client.
- askonomm 5y ago
  Yup, remote worker not employee. That being said, I'm officially a contractor, but I always work for just one client at a time and usually for many years, from Monday to Friday, just like one would with a regular job, except of course remotely. With my current client I even get paid vacations, while still technically being a contractor.
  - learc83 5y ago
    That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You are essentially a full time employee in all but name. Here’s one of the tests. Notice vacation is explicitly called out. > Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation). Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business? Your employer is clearly treating you like an employee while paying you like a contractor. This kind of thing is common. But the more US jobs get outsourced like this, the more likely it is that people will notice and demand enforcement actions.
    - askonomm 5y ago
      I wonder how would one enforce this. I invoice once per month for the hours I logged (that might include vacation hours), but the invoice itself says "Software Development Services {month} {year}". Or do you mean we wouldn't be able to have vacation as part of the contract? Or not allow a contractor to work for one client for more than X time per year? Seems pretty tricky. And how or who would enforce this for me, who is an Estonian citizen, Argentinian resident, and operates from under a USA based LLC as a non-resident USA company owner, working mostly for European start-ups? Which country would do the enforcing in this case?
      - keithnz 5y ago
        the US would want to enforce it, not so much to be nice to Estonians / Argentinians, but to to stop US companies bypassing US workers by going overseas and bypassing laws to protect employees.
      - learc83 5y ago
        Enforcement is relatively easy. Many US states regularly pursue enforcement action for misclassification of employees. Companies already report how much they pay contractors to the IRS and state tax agencies, so spot checking companies paying a large percentage of their total wages to contractors is the easiest way to do it. If you’re being paid by any American companies, the most likely theoretical enforcement would be the state the company is based in.
- learc83 5y ago
  They can do those things. But that’s not what most employers want in my experience. And it’s not how most of these relationships operate. For an example see the response by the OP below. The remote worker is treated like an employee except for how they are paid. Few of the distinctions have to do with being in a certain place at a certain time. It’s more about controlling how they work. And in most the examples I’ve seen, remote workers are expected to be available during a certain set of hours, they must do the work in very specific way, they are forbidden from subcontracting, they are provided tools, the work is expected to continue long term, and the level of control generally prohibits them from working for multiple clients at a time. It’s common for businesses to ignore these guidelines, but the more common it gets for companies to outsource work this way, the more news stories you’ll see and the more likely enforcement will happen.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

askonomm wrote remote worker, not remote employee. A remote worker can be an independent contractor and easily not run afoul of employee/contractor distinctions, especially because a lot of those distinctions have to do with being at a certain place at a certain time, and being locked to one client.

askonomm 5y ago
Yup, remote worker not employee. That being said, I'm officially a contractor, but I always work for just one client at a time and usually for many years, from Monday to Friday, just like one would with a regular job, except of course remotely. With my current client I even get paid vacations, while still technically being a contractor.
- learc83 5y ago
  That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You are essentially a full time employee in all but name. Here’s one of the tests. Notice vacation is explicitly called out. > Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation). Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business? Your employer is clearly treating you like an employee while paying you like a contractor. This kind of thing is common. But the more US jobs get outsourced like this, the more likely it is that people will notice and demand enforcement actions.
  - askonomm 5y ago
    I wonder how would one enforce this. I invoice once per month for the hours I logged (that might include vacation hours), but the invoice itself says "Software Development Services {month} {year}". Or do you mean we wouldn't be able to have vacation as part of the contract? Or not allow a contractor to work for one client for more than X time per year? Seems pretty tricky. And how or who would enforce this for me, who is an Estonian citizen, Argentinian resident, and operates from under a USA based LLC as a non-resident USA company owner, working mostly for European start-ups? Which country would do the enforcing in this case?
    - keithnz 5y ago
      the US would want to enforce it, not so much to be nice to Estonians / Argentinians, but to to stop US companies bypassing US workers by going overseas and bypassing laws to protect employees.
    - learc83 5y ago
      Enforcement is relatively easy. Many US states regularly pursue enforcement action for misclassification of employees. Companies already report how much they pay contractors to the IRS and state tax agencies, so spot checking companies paying a large percentage of their total wages to contractors is the easiest way to do it. If you’re being paid by any American companies, the most likely theoretical enforcement would be the state the company is based in.
learc83 5y ago
They can do those things. But that’s not what most employers want in my experience. And it’s not how most of these relationships operate. For an example see the response by the OP below. The remote worker is treated like an employee except for how they are paid. Few of the distinctions have to do with being in a certain place at a certain time. It’s more about controlling how they work. And in most the examples I’ve seen, remote workers are expected to be available during a certain set of hours, they must do the work in very specific way, they are forbidden from subcontracting, they are provided tools, the work is expected to continue long term, and the level of control generally prohibits them from working for multiple clients at a time. It’s common for businesses to ignore these guidelines, but the more common it gets for companies to outsource work this way, the more news stories you’ll see and the more likely enforcement will happen.