4 ms·
The fact that they are being called partners and not employees is probably something that tax enforcement should look into. I don't know jackshit about Califor
by carlob 14y ago
The fact that they are being called partners and not employees is probably something that tax enforcement should look into.
I don't know jackshit about California law on that, but it seems reasonable that this means that the company is:
1. paying less taxes than it should and shifting the cost onto its employees.
2. denying their workers benefits they would be entitled to as employees (401k, healthcare…).
3. denying their workers rights they would be entitled to as employees (maternity leave…).
4. being far too elastic when demand is low. With employees they'd have constant costs even with no customers.
Those are all reasons why we have labor laws, and why at-will employment can work only for the most sought after professions, and not for blue collars.
- pessimizer 14y agoI'm pretty sure that all of those things are legal.
- carlob 14y agoProbably. Another interesting factoid is that the US is only one of four world countries that doesn't have compulsory maternity leave (some states do though).
- 18pfsmt 14y agoIn the freight transport world, the truckers that work for carriers directly make 1/2 to 1/3 what the independents get. In addition, the independents have the right to chose when they work, so if they want to take a week off, that's their prerogative (no requests required). It's fundamentally, a different arrangement.
- carlob 14y agoThe same holds for the software industry if you are a freelancer you make much more an hour than an employee. On the other hand if a freelancer has only have one source of contracts/income and said freelancer doesn't make significantly more an hour than an employee would, then the employee is getting the short end of the stick. I'm willing to argue that this kind of outsourcing jobs you should employ people for, should be discouraged by law, either by making it more costly for the employer or by actively forcing employers to hire these not-so-free-lancers.