Sanjukta Paul on the exploitative business practice of classifying workers as independent contractors -over at the Frying Pan blog. (This is part I of a three part article; part II and III will be added as they appear)
"He who dislikes the cat, was in his former life, a rat."
« The turban as target: why split hairs? | Main | It's a bird, it's a plane, it's a business / person ... »
The comments to this entry are closed.
An interesting first part, Ruchira. I look forward to parts 2 and 3.
Posted by: Sujatha | August 07, 2012 at 03:07 PM
Here is part II.
http://fryingpannews.org/2012/08/07/name-games-the-cost-of-independent-contractor-misclassification/
The concluding post will appear tomorrow.
Posted by: Ruchira | August 07, 2012 at 03:28 PM
Part III - possible legal remedy.
http://fryingpannews.org/2012/08/08/the-fix-restoring-the-rights-of-misclassified-workers/
Posted by: Ruchira | August 08, 2012 at 12:20 PM
The independent contractor (IC) fiasco is perennial, and more frequently these days we hear about abuses of so-called unpaid internships. A floundering economy prompts eager, desperate workers to give away their labor in exchange for experience and that most passive aggressive of libertarian values, "opportunity" to improve one's lot.
I think Sanjukta is right to recommend targeting industries that egregiously bend or violate the rules. The defense bar is very careful to advise its employer clients to define the IC relationship as rigorously as they do the employer-employee relationship. The kind of advice typically dished out by defense firms: treat employees and ICs differently, don't issue employee manuals to ICs, and limit IC participation in company events (parties, etc.) intended for the employees.
Posted by: Dean C. Rowan | August 08, 2012 at 12:33 PM