The first issue in this case is whether or not the massage therapist is considered to be an employee or an independent contractor. Dream Massage has hired the person as an independent contractor but "exercises complete control over how she does her work", including the provision of clients, materials needed to do the work, and complete control over the massage therapist's schedule.
The IRS defines an independent contractor as follows: "an individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work and not what will be done and how it will be done" (IRS, 2017). The level of control that Dream Massage has over the massage therapist in this scenario is not consistent with the legal definition of an independent contractor. Both the behavioral and financial aspects of the common law definition are consistent with the person being an employee. Thus, it is likely that the massage therapist will be considered to be an employee for taxation purposes.
It is worth noting that the company exerting some control will not automatically convert the worker from independent contractor to employee. However, this case is one where Dream has full control over the worker, and thus the worker would be considered to be an employee.
The second issue in the case is whether...
Normally, these laws only apply to employees, not to independent contractors, but since the massage therapist is an employee, then discrimination laws would apply (Wood, 2011).
The issue of discrimination relates to the order that she cannot wear her hijab as it violates the company's dress policy. Title VII of the Equal Employment Opportunities Act forms the basis of employment discrimation law. But before examining the issues relating to Title VII and hijabs, as assumption must be made that Dream Massage either operates in multiple states or that it has over 15 employees. If it does not, Title VII would not cover the company, and discrimination protections would fall to state or local laws, and the case does not provide information about jurisdiction. So it will be assumed that Dream Massage is covered under Title VII.
Under Title VII, the business is required to provide "reasonable accommodation" for religious garb, as long as it does not cause the business undue hardship. The company's policy on workplace attire does not count as undue hardship, so it would appear that there is a Title VII violation in the request that the person not wear her hijab (Bahler, 2016). The hijab is not a garment that would create issues in performing the…
