You'd have to squint an awful lot for the evaluation to fall out that way. I'm a contracted software dev. I'm going to run down a list of questions from the IRS. Mentally score which ones sound like a cleaning laborer.
I have business cards, a personal website, and a professional reputation. My clients ask for me by name.
I do not submit applications. I do not respond to advertisements of employment.
I often have discretion to have work performed by subordinates selected and instructed by me, not my client.
I receive negligible training from customers.
My work is often evaluated by myself or not evaluated, because I am more competent as to the details than my clients are, this being why they hired me to do it. If there is a checklist, I wrote or had substantial input on the checklist.
I work at hours I pick or by mutual agreement. I routinely do not tell clients when I start or stop working.
If a problem arises with my work, I will ordinarily be the first person told about it.
The services I provide for my clients are largely not their main line of business. They do not invoice customers for my work directly. They generally have no employees who do substantially what I do, this being a major reason why they would hire me.
There is a written contract in place between me and each of my clients, often with contentious custom language in it.
I routinely incur expenses in the course of my business which are not reimbursed by clients.
The Canadian appeals court has actually created precedent for an an economically 'dependent contractor'. That contractors may run their own business and meet many of the independence criteria, but still be working for a single firm or contract.
How does Mc Donalds and others run their franchisee and get away with these ?
Franchisees do not have their own websites (its run by mcd). They have uniforms, clear checklists for employees of franchisees and most of the other points that is mentioned here.
Because the law for individuals and companies is different. In this case, the franchised companies are companies in their own right, and they have employees. Franchised companies usually (?) have a licensing contract with the mothership, not an ownership arrangement. MCD does not 'contract' the franchise employees - that would be trouble. In the redditor's case, that's exactly what he does, down to giving them uniforms.
I have business cards, a personal website, and a professional reputation. My clients ask for me by name.
I do not submit applications. I do not respond to advertisements of employment.
I often have discretion to have work performed by subordinates selected and instructed by me, not my client.
I receive negligible training from customers.
My work is often evaluated by myself or not evaluated, because I am more competent as to the details than my clients are, this being why they hired me to do it. If there is a checklist, I wrote or had substantial input on the checklist.
I work at hours I pick or by mutual agreement. I routinely do not tell clients when I start or stop working.
If a problem arises with my work, I will ordinarily be the first person told about it.
The services I provide for my clients are largely not their main line of business. They do not invoice customers for my work directly. They generally have no employees who do substantially what I do, this being a major reason why they would hire me.
There is a written contract in place between me and each of my clients, often with contentious custom language in it.
I routinely incur expenses in the course of my business which are not reimbursed by clients.