> people being forced to stay just under the legal limit of becoming proper employees. I guess this is where New Zealand works things out differently, it's rea

> people being forced to stay just under the legal limit of becoming proper employees. I guess this is where New Zealand works things out differently, it's really not clear cut about where the legal limit is for employee/contractor which makes it harder to stay closely under it and if the individual case isn't clear cut, the governing body almost always sides with the employee being an employee. I suspect in the US, things are much more favored towards the at-will type employment. >if more than 80% of your income in a given year comes from a single company, they have to employ you. That's quite an interesting solution, I really like it. I feel like it doesn't answer the fundamental legal meaning of contractor vs. employee, but practically it's way easier to test for and I think probably would work better than drawing some vague line in the sand about the meanings in law.