Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
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…
References
Aslam, S. (2011). Hijab in the workplace: Why Title VII does not adequately protect employees from discrimination on the basis of religious dress and appearance. UMKC Law Review Vol 80 (221)
Bahler, K. (2016) What to do if you're afraid to wear a hijab to work. Time Retrieved October 22, 2016 from http://time.com/money/4572115/wear-hijab-work-afraid-civil-rights/
IRS (2017) Independent contractor defined. Internal Revenue Service. Retrieved October 22, 2017 from https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-defined
Wood, R. (2011). Some control won't convert independent contractors to employees. Forbes. Retrieved October 22, 2017 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2011/02/03/some-control-wont-convert-independent-contractors-to-employees/#13de2c434158
Employee vs. Independent Contractor Employees vs. Independent Contractors John, who owns his own consulting firm, is picked to work for Make-a-Bed, a furniture manufacturer and distributor, and since he is not readily available as a full time employee, it is agreed that he should work as independent contractor. He is expected to study the business and make recommendations accordingly, to arrange for his own travel and meetings, dedicate about 20 hours each
Little Lamb Company Regarding our recent discussion about potential legal issues which might arise regarding Mary's termination, it must be concluded that, based on the evidence, Mary is clearly an independent contractor. Independent contractors may be distinguished from standard employees based upon the following criteria: An independent contractor is contracted on a by-project basis, versus having a permanent position at the workplace and his or her employment is largely determined upon
Human Resource Case Study a summary of the facts of the case: A consultant named John Engineer took a job with "Make-a-Bed," a furniture manufacture that wished to consolidate its three plants. He wasn't hired as a regular employee, but rather as an independent contractor. Engineer was given a year to come up with a strategy to consolidate the company operations in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. He was to be paid
Grocers, Inc. Situation Good Grocers is an expanding, up-and-coming new company that needs to preserve its reputation in the competitive grocery industry. As a company which is particularly anxious to promote itself as an ethical organization given its pro-organic and buy-local stance, it must be especially careful to safeguard its positive image in the mind of the public. Given the company's need to avoid a costly lawsuit, alternative dispute resolution would
Independent Contractor Status Boons There are numerous reasons as to why it is of critical importance to distinguish whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor. The first of these pertains to purposes of taxation. Quite simply, there are numerous ramifications that the status of these two options results in for those who select one or the other. In addition to having to fill out numerous different forms (especially
Despite offering such a comprehensive benefits plan, Microsoft has not always been in compliance with laws governing these plans. In the case Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corporation the court ruled that the company denied some of its workers benefits under its Savings plus 401(k) plan (SPP) and Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP) based on the mistaken assumption that they were independent contractors and therefore not eligible for its benefits. Even though these