7 ms·
From the IRS: "You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done).
by dylanjermiah 11y ago
From the IRS: "You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done). This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed."
- dnautics 11y agoDefine 'controlled'. If I hire a plumber to come fix my toilet, I am saying, You are going to fix my toilet, and please do it this way. Does that make the plumber my employee?
- dylanjermiah 11y agoI didn't create the law, I don't think I'm qualified to define anything. I do however think it's intentionally hazy and open to interpretation.
- lotsofmangos 11y agoIf you find yourself telling a plumber which specific way a toilet should be fixed, you are either an employer, or should take some engineer pills. http://dilbert.com/strip/1990-09-13 http://dilbert.com/strip/1990-09-13
- jasode 11y ago>What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed. You can't just pick one bullet point and imply it's an open & shut case. It's a combination of factors. If parents contract a painter to paint a mural in a child's bedroom and says specifically: - I know you prefer acrylic paints but I specifically want latex paint - I know your website portfolio had examples of light blue but I specifically want Pantone #2945 dark shade of blue - I know you prefer to work 9-5 but I need you to work onsite from 5pm to 9pm because that's when I'll be home from work and can give live feedback as to how it's done - I know that if I leave you to your own judgement, you'd prefer to paint Greek & Roman nudes but I need this room to be rated G so if you can paint a depiction of Mickey Mouse fighting Batman, that's what I'm looking for. - ... and so on... The homeowner can be excruciatingly specific about how & when the work is exactly performed but most reasonable people will not insist that the painter is an "employee." It takes more factors than just control of the work method. Maybe Uber's combination of other factors does ultimately mean drivers are employees but your extraction of one IRS guideline is not convincing.
- dylanjermiah 11y agoPerhaps I should have been more clear as to have prevented assumptions. I do not think that ride sharing drivers are employees. The IRS's definitions are not clear, objective or definite. They're open to interpretation and abuse.
- smil 11y agoUber is not a "ride sharing" service.
- dylanjermiah 11y agoAgree. What's a more appropriate term to use?
- extra88 11y agoTaxi service.
- imaginenore 11y agoTaxi arrangement service. They don't actually taxi you.
- extra88 11y agoIf Uber drivers are classified as employees, not contractors, then Uber does actually taxi you. That's the issue at hand.
- waterlesscloud 11y agoUnlicensed taxi service, with the pros and cons that implies.
- pja 11y agoRight - the parent / painter job is going to fail on the "ongoing relationship" part of being an employee - once the painter has painted the room they go off to another job. Uber on the other hand, definitely has an ongoing relationship with their drivers, as well as specifying how they work in fairly detailed ways.
- paulsutter 11y agoSo you're saying the uber driver is an employee of the passenger? I often tell them which route to take. I guess passengers also have control over whether the driver keeps his job (via ratings) too.