|
4770 The most significant factor in deciding whether a worker is an independent contractor or employee is the right to control the details of the work; under an agreement titled "employment application," but that referred to plaintiff as "contractor," by which plaintiff was hired to do work requiring skill and certification, and required plaintiff to submit reports and questions to the hirer's client, rather than to the hirer, and to supply his own equipment, and to receive no benefits, under circumstances such that the hirer did nothing more than pay plaintiff and send him to the jobsite, did not have a representative at the site, and did not know the details of plaintiff's work, plaintiff was an independent contractor rather than an employee; payment by the hour rather than by the job did not change the relationship to an employment relationship, and neither did the fact that the agreement contained an "at will" clause.CitationVARISCO v GATEWAY SCIENCE (Construction Inspector) 166 CA4 1099 [See: Gerrard v Industrial Acc Com 17 C2 411; Borello v Department of Ind Rel 48 C3 341]
|
|
