California Democrats are poised to pass landmark employment legislation over the objections of two of the companies that would be most affected: Silicon Valley ride-sharing giants Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc.
The bill already passed the State Assembly 59-15 and is expected to be voted on in the state Senate before the legislative session ends on Friday, possibly as soon as Monday night. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he would sign the bill, which intends to force companies that rely on “gig workers” to reclassify them as employees, likely upending the business model of those companies.
Uber and Lyft have spent much of the year pushing lawmakers to alter the bill or exempt them. That effort has failed against opposition from labor unions and a large Democratic majority in Sacramento. The companies have argued the bill would introduce new costs and logistical challenges that would be bad for them and many of their employees, who prefer job flexibility. If the measure becomes law, it is expected to have national repercussions given California’s economic importance and history of creating precedent-setting business regulations.
Related Stories
The California appeals court found that a labour measure, known as Proposition 22, was largely constitutional.
Labour groups and some workers had opposed the measure, saying it robbed them of rights like sick leave.
The firms say the proposition protects other benefits such as flexibility.
The latest ruling overturns a decision made by a lower court in California in 2021, which found that Proposition 22 affected lawmakers' powers to set standards at the workplace.
The state of California and a group representing Uber, Lyft and other firms appealed against the decision.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @08:58PM
http://www.camhub.cc/get_image/2/56d17cd656f72c35ba298f8a46684384/main/9999x9999/0/356/18108.jpg/ [camhub.cc]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:01PM (6 children)
I predict California Democrats will have to use old fashioned taxi service.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:15PM (3 children)
But if Uber and Lyft cease to do business within California, how will poser coders get around Silicon Valley to their SJW meetups?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:14PM (1 child)
Rickshaws pulled by former Uber and Lyft drivers.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:56PM
Rickshaws pulled by former uber and lyft investors?
Nah - the original investors have already gotten their capital back and are leaving the rest to ride. It's always going to be the bag-holders and employees who get screwed.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:19PM
First, most California residents aren't coders. Second, most SJWs aren't coders.
The people sleeping on the streets in San Francisco very well could be coders, given the use of contractors and the lack of housing.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:46PM (1 child)
California Democrats are limousine liberals with chauffeurs. The assholes making these laws are in no way affected by them. This is just like the other full-retard law Gavin just signed banning the discipline of disruptive students from K to 8th grade because disciplining disruptive students is "racist" and part of the "school to prison pipeline."
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:59PM
You forgot to mention that disciplining children might prevent a school shooter.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:08PM (21 children)
They clearly aren't employees, IMHO, but I say that as someone who's been doing gig work for over 20 years (as an employee of a self-owned company).
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 5, Funny) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:13PM (3 children)
Am I forgiven for the typo yet?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:20PM (2 children)
The classy thing to do was not to apologize. Walk the plank for your cheesy apology.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:29PM (1 child)
Oops, I spoke too soon. The grammar in my above comment was/is horrendous, and I unequivocally retract my criticism of PhatFuk, or whomever.
cheers,
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:35PM
Disregard that I suck cocks.
(Score: 3, Touché) by DannyB on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:24PM (2 children)
If they are being underpaid AND exploited then THAT WOULD MAKE THEM employees under state law.
Not independable confactors.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:30PM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:09PM
that whole sentence sounds like a politicans sentence, one which intends to indicate that anyone that disagrees is somehow without sense or a grasp of simple things.
it could be the state law is clarifying what they believe the terms mean, and making it so -- much to the disappointment of the exploitative business model.
no one should cheer uber's business model, and the sooner it fails, the better everyone else will be, even if it no longer means you get to exploit the drivers with the click of a button, too.
(Score: 5, Informative) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:54PM (11 children)
They're employees. They don't have the same right to refuse to pick up a client that a gig coder has to refuse a job. The ride-share companies are quick to penalize drivers who they think aren't hustling enought. They've also unilaterally cut rates, and instead of taking less profit, they've taken it out of the driver's remuneration. No contract rate negotiation - just take-it-or-leave-it employer-employee relationship (absent a union).
A gig coder gets to negotiate the pay rate (whether hourly or by job). Employees don't get to do that, which is another reason they're employees and not independent contractors. If they were able to negotiate rates with the clients, they'd be contractors.
Who pays them? The ride-share company, not the client. The client pays the ride share company, who both sets the price and the driver's cut - another indication that there is no independent contracting going on between the driver and the client.
Without the negotiation of a contract between the client and the driver, the drivers are simply not contractors.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:02PM (5 children)
If your answer is negative, then he's just dropped his lower bound to 49.99 $/hr, you'd better not disagree any more or he might lower his upper bound too.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 4, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:28PM (4 children)
The driver isn't negotiating with the client - hence the driver isn't entering into a contract with the client, and can't be considered a contractor.
Surge pricing puts this in the spotlight - the driver STILL isn't negotiating the rate, even when they would have huge leverage. It's all done by the rideshare company's algorithms.
Anyone who's done contracting knows that you'll get customers who will try to play the "I can get it for less from $SOMEBODY_ELSE" game, and that the best thing to do is just say you aren't willing to do it for that price, thank them, and stay on good terms for the next time.
Negotiating a contract isn't always the end result of negotiations, but it requires negotiations. Ride-share drivers don't get to negotiate a contract with their customers.
It's like taking a taxi - the price is what's on the meter, unless you negotiate a fixed price in advance, which is what a lot of small businesses do for small package deliveries via taxi, negotiate a contract. A package doesn't puke on the back seat, doesn't get confused as to where they're going, doesn't ask to stop by the ATM to get the cash to pay for the ride, and isn't going to make a fuss if you stop to use the washroom or buy something to eat.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday September 11 2019, @01:35AM (2 children)
Uber's business model depends on them exploiting someone.
If they can't exploit the customers then they need to exploit the drivers because if they don't they have no unique selling point.
Where I live we deregulated our taxi industry 20 years ago, and it was a total shit-show for a couple of years as every man and his dog with a smoke-belching old wreck decided they were a taxi driver forcing the price down to the point where no-one made any money.
As soon as the unreliable and incompetent went out of business, the industry settled down. Taxis are cheap and plentiful, but the drivers can make a living.
That is the market Uber has try to compete in, and guess what? They can't. They not cheaper, the cars are not better and their App doesn't do anything the taxi companies apps don't do.
The last I heard they are really struggling to find drivers, so the service is not even that good anymore.
I guess that only leaves the shareholders left to exploit really and I'm not sure how they manage that while they lose $2 billion every year.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:24AM (1 child)
Zombies aren't really well-known for their car (or body) maintenance. Dogs, well ... I guess on Uber, nobody knows you're a dog.
Taxi companies have apps? This is news to me, I guess (at least in the US).
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:44AM
They do in Oz now as well as New Zombieland.
I would guess that was the best thing to come out of Uber. It forced the taxi companies to modernize and co-operate to provide a better service.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday September 11 2019, @07:31AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:39AM (1 child)
On the other hand, most drivers are uber and lift at the same time. Is it OK for an employee to share her time with another company?
It is a real question for me. I work mostly from home. Can I legally work from home for two different companies full time?
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @12:12PM
IANAL; but I suggest you verify the contract texts. If it contains working hours you'll probably run into issues,
if they don't contain working hours and only describe what work is expected to be done and completed you're probably fine.
Either way, much depends on the boss, if he/she finds out and is being a dick you can lose that job either way. You can consult a lawyer, or, I would ask the bosses. If they are fine with it (preferably in writing) the need for a lawyer goes away.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:39AM (2 children)
Just to play devils advocate, you could look at it as two contracts. One between the driver and uber, one between the passenger and uber.
Uber certainly isn't an employee of the passenger, so that leaves the contract between uber and the driver.
Uber being the main (or sole) source of the gigs gives them the market position of being able to say "this is the price we are offering for this gig take it or leave it".
If you decide to leave it, then they are within their rights to give you less consideration for future gigs. When I am outsourcing tasks I am less likely to ask for quotes from companies who regularly decline to perform the work.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:44PM (1 child)
What I find funny is that the rideshare companies think that drivers would vote against this in a ballot measure. Not a chance. You're going to vote against vacation pay, health care benefits, and a guaranteed minimum for your labour? Only if you're an idiot.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:45PM
Only idiot I saw get mooted was you barbarahudson. Apk utterly dismantled and destroyed you on hosts files, C/C++ security/speed issues it has vs. Pascal, your blowhard erroneous lies he cut to pieces and you being caught admitting you stalk him by unidentifiable anon posts https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:46PM (1 child)
Why are they "clearly" not employees?
I'm an independent contractor too, but some of the things that define my relationship with my clients that are plainly different from the relationship between ride-sharing drivers and Uber/Lyft:
- I have more than 1 client, so I don't answer to a single organization. Uber and Lyft drivers mostly do answer to a single company when they're working.
- I have near-complete autonomy about how I complete the work. Uber/Lyft drivers mostly don't.
- I can and do negotiate terms with my clients regarding rates, expectations, who owns what after the work's done, etc. Uber/Lyft drivers can't do that at all.
All 3 of those are part of a court's test for whether somebody is an employee or independent contractor. A potentially useful comparison is between Uber/Lyft and private car services: The main difference between the two is that car services own their fleets and are responsible for fuel, maintenance, and insurance while Uber/Lyft has successfully pushed all those costs onto the drivers. Which would be a little like a programming shop that demands that everybody use their personal laptop rather than providing one.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:09AM
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Snotnose on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:42PM (4 children)
Newspapers have been running full page ads for a week, seems their delivery folks will also need to be converted into employees.
We won't mention how quiet they were about it until they had some skin in the game.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:51PM (2 children)
Well that fucking sucks, I guess I can kiss the little good content left in the Reader and Citybeat goodbye in exchange for yet even more marijuana ads.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:46PM (1 child)
There's always the North Park Rainbow newspaper that's delivered by library drag queens.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday September 11 2019, @01:38AM
That sounds awesome! I wish we had something like that.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:08PM
So why don't they seize the opportunity to branch into daily scheduled document, parcel and package delivery?
Seems to me that it's a way to solve the problem of declining newspaper revenue - after all, you have to get your product delivered every day to the same people in the same area.
Let local small retailers bypass Amazon's and the USPS infrastructure completely. And the newspaper companies at least appear to be less sketchy than bike couriers.
They run a distribution network that's up and running in the wee hours of the night, with delivery before the recipient goes to work in the morning. A lot better than having packages dropped off during the day when they can be stolen, or having to take time off to be home for it.
Get your meds, your newspapers, your tablets and smartphones and laptops delivered to your door overnight.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Sulla on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:50PM (8 children)
Now instead of being either employees or independent contractors they get to be unemployed, but at least the lawyers will get a nice paycheck.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 5, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:28PM (4 children)
If the business could only exist because of unicorn drug-addled investors dumping billions into it, then it's going to die anyway.
If there's sufficient demand to employ people at a fair wage without unicorn money, then the business will continue to exist even after the employees are classified as such.
If the only way your business model can survive is to exploit loopholes and people, you deserve to die, same as any other business that tries to get ahead by, say, avoiding taxes by taking cash payments, not paying required permits, not meeting safety codes, skipping required maintenance, etc.
It's like the Tim Hortons here that don't want to pay a higher wage, and are now operating as drive-thru only. Other franchisees are paying the higher wages and getting the customers that they are losing. Yes, there are fewer employees overall, but the ones who are working in the full-service locations are making more money.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:00PM (3 children)
The problem is that cities have traditionally limited the number of taxi's allowed on the streets. This allowed the taxi drivers to make a living wage, which was inconvenient to those who wanted rides. It also allowed the requirements of bonding and insurance, which the Uber and Lyft drivers have ignored.
Is this good or bad? Well, both. I'm not actually sure I believe those studies that claim that, when you count depreciation, wear, and gas, the Uber drivers are losing money with each fare (it was Uber that was studied, not Lyft), but I do accept that it's close enough to be plausible.
OTOH, many people certainly do find Uber and Lyft to be convenient.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Wednesday September 11 2019, @12:00AM (1 child)
Try getting a ride-share at a reasonable price during a crisis. Taxi fares are fixed - no surge pricing.
Competition ensured that there were enough cabs around at a low enough price that everyone benefits. The drivers could earn a living, and the people needing a ride were able to get one.
People are getting fed up with what are basically "job-sharing/destroying apps". I submitted a story earlier today about one city's solution to Airbnb not paying business taxes, etc. - they dug up the driveways, sewers, and water supplies until the hosts paid their business taxes.
If you're going to compete, do it fairly. People are fed up with this crap.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:32AM
This is not a bug, it's a feature called free market. Number of rideshares is limited, if you want to be served, pay more or serve others and get rewarded for the help. Taxis, on the other hand, are always in crisis, and you always pay more. Taxi licenses are a source of corruption in some cities, as a mere mortal cannot get one. But the mayor's nephew can, and he then leases the privilege to the driver, earning money out of thin air. For that reason alone artificial cab constraints should be cast away and forgotten as a bad dream.
Hard to disagree. Unfortunately cab companies would rather keep their own sandbox with their own rules. How about just declaring statewide that any licensed driver can take passengers for a fee? His only duty will be to pay taxes. Insurance? That can strangle any good idea; make it optional - this will keep the prices low, but still motivate drivers to buy insurance that will shield them from a large expense in case of an accident. Uber and Lyft and many others will then work for drivers by connecting passengers and drivers via their software. But the driver must be able to work without them if he wants to.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Wednesday September 11 2019, @01:07AM
The problem is that cities have traditionally limited the number of taxi's allowed on the streets.
Then address that problem.
Why should a predatory comercial entity get a... ummm... free ride on it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:33PM (1 child)
Worker: We're not getting paid enough! Raise our wages!
Employer: No.
Judge: Yes!
Employer: Time to fire a bunch of people.
Sure, that's not necessarily the way it will play out, but it's quite probable.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by deimtee on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:53AM
At the moment Uber needs a one driver to to one fare ratio. You can't sack 1 in 3 drivers and tell the other two to drive a car and a half like they do in factories.
As soon as Uber can use self-driving cars to get rid of drivers they are all fired anyway, may as well get reasonable pay until then.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:56PM
Good. I hope companies like Uber and Lyft, which require proprietary software and violate your privacy, disappear. They won't, but I wish they would. Same for Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and so on.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by mendax on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:48PM (1 child)
It should be noted that this bill is bad news to taxi companies as well. Taxi drivers in California tend to be independent contractors who lease the cab from the taxi company. (I know this from first hand experience as I was a taxi driver once upon a time in what seems to be a different lifetime.) This bill will make them have to bring on their independent contractors as real employees.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday September 11 2019, @07:00PM
Interesting, but doubtful on a couple of grounds. The taxi company's job, they will say, is not actually providing transport itself but also leasing you your cab and providing the dispatch services for it. The rates you charge are (usually) regulated by law and neither the company nor you has a direct say in what will be charged, which gets the company out of the 'we tell you how much to charge' test. That's much different from Uber and Lyft: You don't rent your vehicle from them, and they very much determine how much you will be paid for a given run even if those structure are opaque (as opposed to you individually negotiating with a client). Because those structures are opaque also means that you have not been given the opportunity to calculate how much you will make from Uber or Lyft for a given call - if you don't know your consideration you're not in a contract. There are no penalties if you decide you're not driving for Uber or Lyft, but if you blow off your cab company they'll start renting your cab to someone else who is more consistent (and that actually means Uber and Lyft are closer to employers than the cab company by the tests I listed below). Uber or Lyft can bounce you at any time they want (is my understanding), where a cab company you have your cab for the time you're leasing it - you can be bounced tomorrow (or when your lease ends) but that's because the lease runs for the period it does.'
The TL/DR is that cab companies and livery services do indeed have different relationships with those who drive for them. A cab company you have a lease contract for the cab plus dispatch but you're free to cruise around and pick people up who haven't asked for dispatch. Uber/Lyft you're at their mercy to get work and for how much the entire time you drive for them.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:09PM (1 child)
Before Uber and Lyft was around the state of California did not care at all for the interests of taxi cab drivers. I've talked to them and they told me that their compensation was garbage. It seemed like the state of California only ever cared about the interests of medallion holders and about limiting competition. Now that Uber and Lyft are around the State suddenly cares? Doubtful. Let's be clear, they only care about medallion holders and about limiting competition here.
I think the bigger question here is why do these limited medallions still exist. If the state really cares about its people it would eliminate these limited medallion requirements. But no, instead, it aims to figure out ways to limit competition harming both the consumers and the drivers/workers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @06:31AM
Medallions? In California? What are you, some East Coast idiot? Get your facts straight if you want to have any credibility, you scabby Uber driver contractor looser, you!
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday September 11 2019, @06:49PM
From https://www.oregon.gov/ODA/shared/Documents/Publications/NaturalResources/20FactorTestforIndependentContractors.pdf [oregon.gov] they give a good summary of the IRS 20 point test for contractor vs. employee plus the other evaluating factors. (Keeping in mind that the criteria are not absolute but case by case tests are made). Here's their criteria:
• Level of instruction. If the company directs when, where, and how work is done, this control indicates a possible employment relationship.
• Amount of training. Requesting workers to undergo company-provided training suggests an employment relationship since the company is directing the methods by which work is accomplished.
• Degree of business integration. Workers whose services are integrated into business operations or significantly affect business success are likely to be considered employees.
• Extent of personal services. Companies that insist on a particular person performing the work assert a degree of control that suggests an employment relationship. In contrast, independent contractors typically are free to assign work to anyone.
• Control of assistants. If a company hires, supervises, and pays a worker's assistants, this control indicates a possible employment relationship. If the worker retains control over hiring, supervising, and paying helpers, this arrangement suggests an independent contractor relationship.
• Continuity of relationship. A continuous relationship between a company and a worker indicates a possible employment relationship. However, an independent contractor arrangement can involve an ongoing relationship for multiple, sequential projects.
• Flexibility of schedule. People whose hours or days of work are dictated by a company are apt to qualify as its employees.
• Demands for full-time work. Full-time work gives a company control over most of a person's time, which supports a finding of an employment relationship.
• Need for on-site services. Requiring someone to work on company premises—particularly if the work can be performed elsewhere—indicates a possible employment relationship.
• Sequence of work. If a company requires work to be performed in specific order or sequence, this control suggests an employment relationship.
• Requirements for reports. If a worker regularly must provide written or oral reports on the status of a project, this arrangement indicates a possible employment relationship.
• Method of payment. Hourly, weekly, or monthly pay schedules are characteristic of employment relationships, unless the payments simply are a convenient way of distributing a lump-sum fee. Payment on commission or project completion is more characteristic of independent contractor relationships.
• Payment of business or travel expenses. Independent contractors typically bear the cost of travel or business expenses, and most contractors set their fees high enough to cover these costs. Direct reimbursement of travel and other business costs by a company suggests an employment relationship.
• Provision of tools and materials. Workers who perform most of their work using company-provided equipment, tools, and materials are more likely to be considered employees. Work largely done using independently obtained supplies or tools supports an independent contractor finding.
• Investment in facilities. Independent contractors typically invest in and maintain their own work facilities. In contrast, most employees rely on their employer to provide work facilities.
• Realization of profit or loss. Workers who receive predetermined earnings and have little chance to realize significant profit or loss through their work generally are employees.
• Work for multiple companies. People who simultaneously provide services for several unrelated companies are likely to qualify as independent contractors.
• Availability to public. If a worker regularly makes services available to the general public, this supports an independent contractor determination.
• Control over discharge. A company's unilateral right to discharge a worker suggests an employment relationship. In contrast, a company's ability to terminate independent contractor relationships generally depends on contract terms.
• Right of termination. Most employees unilaterally can terminate their work for a company without liability. Independent contractors cannot terminate services without liability, except as allowed under their contracts.
FLSA tests include:
• the degree to which the employer controls or directs the manner in which work is performed,
• whether the worker's opportunity for profit or loss depends on his or her managerial skills,
• whether the worker's duties are performed for the employer on an ongoing or permanent basis,
• whether the service performed by the worker is an integral part of the employer's business,
• the extent of the worker's investment in equipment or materials needed to perform the job, and
• the degree to which the worker is engaged primarily for the benefit of the employer.
This sig for rent.