My fiance was terminated from her job

[untateve]

My wife took the day before her delivery off.

 

Two days before, she was working.

 

 

My wife worked up to the moment of delivery, went outside and leaned against a tree, grunted, and delivered our son. She then came in and made me a sammich.

[keggerz]

for grits since he must have missed it earlier:

 

Well it sure looks to me that she fits the definition of an EMPLOYEE

 

 

Independent Contractor

 

People such as lawyers, contractors, subcontractors and auctioneers who follow an independent trade, business, or profession in which they offer their services to the public, are generally not employees. However, whether such people are employees or independent contractors depends on the facts in each case.

 

The general rule is that an individual is an independent contractor if you, the person for whom the services are performed, have the right to control or direct only the result of the work and not the means and methods of accomplishing the result.

 

 

 

Employee (Common-Law Employee)

 

Under common-law rules, anyone who performs services for you is your employee if you can control what will be done and how it will be done. This is so even when you give the employee freedom of action. What matters is that you have the right to control the details of how the services are performed.

 

 

 

Statutory Employees

 

If workers are independent contractors under the common law rules, such workers may nevertheless be treated as employees by statute (statutory employees) for certain employment tax purposes if they fall within any one of the following four categories and meet the three conditions described under Social Security and Medicare taxes, below.

 

 

Statutory Nonemployees

 

There are generally two categories of statutory nonemployees: direct sellers and licensed real estate agents. They are treated as self-employed for all Federal tax purposes, including income and employment taxes, if:

 

*

Substantially all payments for their services as direct sellers or real estate agents are directly related to sales or other output, rather than to the number of hours worked, and

*

Their services are performed under a written contract providing that they will not be treated as employees for Federal tax purposes.

 

 

 

I suppose that these definitions are wrong, right?

 

AND MORE:

 

MORE:

 

Common Law Rules

 

Facts that provide evidence of the degree of control and independence fall into three categories:

 

1.

Behavioral: Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job?

2.

Financial: Are the business aspects of the worker’s job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.)

3.

Type of Relationship: Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation pay, etc.)? Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business?

 

Businesses must weigh all these factors when determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. Some factors may indicate that the worker is an employee, while other factors indicate that the worker is an independent contractor. There is no “magic” or set number of factors that “makes” the worker an employee or an independent contractor, and no one factor stands alone in making this determination. Also, factors which are relevant in one situation may not be relevant in another.

 

The keys are to look at the entire relationship, consider the degree or extent of the right to direct and control, and finally, to document each of the factors used in coming up with the determination.

 

 

Type of Relationship

 

 

Type of relationship refers to facts that show how the worker and business perceive their relationship to each other.

 

The factors, for the type of relationship between two parties, generally fall into the categories of:

 

*

Written contracts

*

Employee benefits

*

Permanency of the relationship

*

Services provided as key activity of the business

 

Written Contracts

 

Although a contract may state that the worker is an employee or an independent contractor, this is not sufficient to determine the worker’s status. The IRS is not required to follow a contract stating that the worker is an independent contractor, responsible for paying his or her own self employment tax. How the parties work together determines whether the worker is an employee or an independent contractor.

 

Employee Benefits

 

Employee benefits include things like insurance, pension plans, paid vacation, sick days, and disability insurance. Businesses generally do not grant these benefits to independent contractors. However, the lack of these types of benefits does not necessarily mean the worker is an independent contractor.

 

Permanency of the Relationship

 

If you hire a worker with the expectation that the relationship will continue indefinitely, rather than for a specific project or period, this is generally considered evidence that the intent was to create an employer-employee relationship.

 

Services Provided as Key Activity of the Business

 

If a worker provides services that are a key aspect of the business, it is more likely that the business will have the right to direct and control his or her activities. For example, if a law firm hires an attorney, it is likely that it will present the attorney’s work as its own and would have the right to control or direct that work. This would indicate an employer-employee relationship.

 

Form SS-8

 

After reviewing the three categories of evidence, if you are still unsure if a worker is an employee or an independent contractor, the business can file Form SS-8, Determination of Worker Status for Purposes of Federal Employment Taxes and Income Tax Withholding (PDF) with the IRS. The form may be filed by either the business or the worker. The IRS will review the facts and circumstances and officially determine the worker’s status.

 

Be aware that it can take up to six months to get a determination, but a business that continually hires the same types of workers to perform particular services may want to consider filing the Form Form SS-8 (PDF).

 

FORM SS-8

Edited July 17, 2008 by keggerz

[AtomicCEO]

I think Blitz has made a couple good points.

 

The main one being: The Blitz doesn't make his decisions based on the narrow constraints of reality.

 

I learned a lot.

[keggerz]

My wife worked up to the moment of delivery, went outside and leaned against a tree, grunted, and delivered our son. She then came in and made me a sammich.

My wife made me a sammich while she was giving birth

[Grits and Shins]

When sox wins his lawsuit I happily admit how wrong I was ... until then his wife was a hired gun and it was within the USPS's rights to terminate her at their discretion.

[keggerz]

When sox wins his lawsuit I happily admit how wrong I was ... until then his wife was a hired gun and it was within the USPS's rights to terminate her at their discretion.

but what does that do to your statement about EMPLOYEES getting benefits and people that dont get benefits NOT being employees?

 

If it takes you a week or two to read what I posted above I understand, take your time so it really sinks in

[keggerz]

Hey, no problem. I appreciated the thought. I actually went to the Friday night Tides game, and guess what? As I was walking up to the ticket booth, some lady called me over and asked if I needed a ticket. Some friends of hers had given her extra tickets and she was just giving it away, so I got in for free. Can't beat that! Couple of cold beers and an awesome italian sausage w/ onions and peppers went down very nicely.

 

 

cool...where did you sit(not that there is really a bad seat in the joint)? Our season tickets are down the 1st baseline(section 108 row H seat 1/2)

[yo mama]

FOR CAREER EMPLOYEES ... NOT FOR EVERYBODY I CUT A CHECK TO

It applies to all "employees." The only way you're paying someone who is a non-employee is if they are an independent contractor. There is no "career" requirement.

[yo mama]

My wife made me a sammich while she was giving birth

Mmmmm, placenta!

[AtomicCEO]

It applies to all "employees." The only way you're paying someone who is a non-employee is if they are an independent contractor. There is no "career" requirement.

 

Good Lord... stop explaining it to him. He doesn't care.

[Grits and Shins]

So ... if we had all of the following scenarios all of you believe that none of these employees would be terminated:

 

Pilot / bus driver / air traffic controller / television director ... has to have an emergency procedure that will deprive them of their sight for 9 months after which they are expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

Court stenographer / computer programmer / administrative assistant ... loses the use of their hands for 9 months after which they are expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

Waiter / meter reader / postal or package delivery man / tour guide / dancer ... breaks both legs and will be unable to walk for 9 months but is expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

You are telling me that these people would not be released for their failure to do their jobs?

[Squeegiebo]

You know I once thought about applying for a position at the post office but never followed through ... I should sue the USPS for reverse discrimination because they never considered my application.

 

Makes about as much sense as considering anybody that collects money from the post office as a postal employee ... and granting them full rights and protections as an employee.

 

 

FOR CAREER EMPLOYEES ... NOT FOR EVERYBODY I CUT A CHECK TO

 

You know, if you would actually take the time to read the replies in a thread rather than skipping throght 10 pages in a hurry to share your opinions, you'd save yourself the humiliation of posting idiotic stuff like this.

 

THE STATUTE SAYS THAT FOR PURPOSES OF THE FMLA, AN "EMPLOYEE" IS ANYONE WHO WORKED 1250 HOURS WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THE PERSON IS A CAREER EMPLOYEE. THE CAREER/CASUAL DISTINCTION MAY APPLY TO OTHER TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT SUCH AS BENEFITS, BUT IT IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT WHEN APPLYING THIS FEDERAL STATUTE.

[Grits and Shins]

You know, if you would actually take the time to read the replies in a thread rather than skipping throght 10 pages in a hurry to share your opinions, you'd save yourself the humiliation of posting idiotic stuff like this.

 

THE STATUTE SAYS THAT FOR PURPOSES OF THE FMLA, AN "EMPLOYEE" IS ANYONE WHO WORKED 1250 HOURS WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THE PERSON IS A CAREER EMPLOYEE. THE CAREER/CASUAL DISTINCTION MAY APPLY TO OTHER TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT SUCH AS BENEFITS, BUT IT IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT WHEN APPLYING THIS FEDERAL STATUTE.

 

Then in your mind this is a slam dunk ... I will wager you next year's Huddle Membership fees that sox does not win his case.

[tonorator]

Then in your mind this is a slam dunk ... I will wager you next year's Huddle Membership fees that sox does not win his case.

 

tough talk and an intriguing proposition for sure. the plot thickens ... tune in next time for the next episode of << you fill in the blank here >>

[Chavez]

ya know, I don't know if she qualifies for the FMLA, looks like she probably does as far as I can tell, but isn't that kind of screwed up? you take a job under the condition that you can be gone any day. if they have a slow week, you can be gone. if you break your ankle rock climbing, you can be gone. if you're late one day, you can be gone. but then we have laws that say, if the cause of your inability to work is pregnancy, well then suddenly your totally temporary, totally undependable work situation just became a guaranteed job for the next nine months (even though you can no longer perform the duties) and for at least 6 months after that whenever you happen to decide you want it. that is kind of a funky set of laws.

Our government has a vested interest in making sure that the populace gets married, buys homes, and procreates. Ergo tax credits for the first two and employment protection for the latter.

[Azazello1313]

I can imagine a few reasons why sox's complaint may not succeed. her not being an "employee" ain't one of 'em, grits. she's definitely an employee under any definition of the word I've ever seen.

[Grits and Shins]

I can imagine a few reasons why sox's complaint may not succeed. her not being an "employee" ain't one of 'em, grits. she's definitely an employee under any definition of the word I've ever seen.

 

I can how you might mistake a person that is on a contract that must be renewed on a repeated specified time-frame with no benefits as an employee.

 

Clearly sox's wife is getting screwed over and should not only sue for wrongful termination but for all those other benefits that employees get from their employers.

[Grits and Shins]

So ... if we had all of the following scenarios all of you believe that none of these employees would be terminated:

 

Pilot / bus driver / air traffic controller / television director ... has to have an emergency procedure that will deprive them of their sight for 9 months after which they are expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

Court stenographer / computer programmer / administrative assistant ... loses the use of their hands for 9 months after which they are expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

Waiter / meter reader / postal or package delivery man / tour guide / dancer ... breaks both legs and will be unable to walk for 9 months but is expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

You are telling me that these people would not be released for their failure to do their jobs?

 

Nobody cares to respond to this?

[Azazello1313]

I can how you might mistake a person that is on a contract that must be renewed on a repeated specified time-frame with no benefits as an employee.

 

wha?

 

tell you what. you find any definition of "employee" that excludes sox's wife. you've got the whole innernets at your disposal, all you gotta do is find one definition. you've had several people point out to you several times that an employee is anyone who is paid to do work and the person paying has control over how the work is performed. that is all "employee" means. if you want to continue to assert otherwise, please back it up somehow.

[keggerz]

Nobody cares to respond to this?

Why would we? It is IDIOTIC

 

wha?

 

tell you what. you find any definition of "employee" that excludes sox's wife. you've got the whole innernets at your disposal, all you gotta do is find one definition. you've had several people point out to you several times that an employee is anyone who is paid to do work and the person paying has control over how the work is performed. that is all "employee" means. if you want to continue to assert otherwise, please back it up somehow.

yeah he has completely ignored the definitions I posted

[Chavez]

Ah, Blitz never fails to bring a thread to new levels of thickheaded stupidity.

[TheShiznit]

Blitz, a casual for the USPS is an actual employee....just a different class of employee....but an employee nonetheless.

 

FWIW Sox, just found out that as of the end of summer or right arounds there, the USPS are not going to be using any more casual employees....they are going to something called a TE and I have no idea what that is or what it means!!!!!

 

BTW, every USPS employee....I deal with a ton of them since I am an expert on their benefits.... thinks this is a lose/lose situation for you. First off, she will never get hired....NEVER....at leas not where you are at. Second....you will be watched like a hawk and they assure me there is all sorts of ways to be written up legitly without raising eyebrows about retaliation. None of them would even consider it for a casual....however, if it were a career employee.....they would raise all sorts of stink.

 

Again, I understand it is a dilemma....but pros and cons are pros and cons...and need to be weighed without emotion.

[montster]

So ... if we had all of the following scenarios all of you believe that none of these employees would be terminated:

 

Pilot / bus driver / air traffic controller / television director ... has to have an emergency procedure that will deprive them of their sight for 9 months after which they are expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

Court stenographer / computer programmer / administrative assistant ... loses the use of their hands for 9 months after which they are expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

Waiter / meter reader / postal or package delivery man / tour guide / dancer ... breaks both legs and will be unable to walk for 9 months but is expected to make a full and complete recovery. Shows up to work with a doctor's note saying they can't perform their job for the next 9 months.

 

You are telling me that these people would not be released for their failure to do their jobs?

 

i have no response to this. but i am really curious about the mind of grits. here is my scenario (and i'm serious, this isn't a joke):

 

grits: your wife works as a "casual" employee at the post office, where she often has to lift tubs weighing as much as 50 pounds. she gets pregnant. her doctor writes her a note saying she is not to lift anything more than 25 pounds. she takes it to work, shows her supervisor and is promptly terminated. she calls you, upset and angry. you say, "tough sh!t, honey, you're not an employee, so they can do whatever they want." is that correct?

[Sox]

FWIW Sox, just found out that as of the end of summer or right arounds there, the USPS are not going to be using any more casual employees....they are going to something called a TE and I have no idea what that is or what it means!!!!!

 

BTW, every USPS employee....I deal with a ton of them since I am an expert on their benefits.... thinks this is a lose/lose situation for you. First off, she will never get hired....NEVER....at leas not where you are at. Second....you will be watched like a hawk and they assure me there is all sorts of ways to be written up legitly without raising eyebrows about retaliation. None of them would even consider it for a casual....however, if it were a career employee.....they would raise all sorts of stink.

 

Again, I understand it is a dilemma....but pros and cons are pros and cons...and need to be weighed without emotion.

 

TE stands for transitional employee.They are above casuals,do get some benefits and earn more money.I've never heard of any facility not using casuals,but many stations use them as carriers to deliver the mail.But that's in my little corner here in Ohio.

[Sox]

If they can show that (1) people with lifting restrictions are given light duty work when it is available and are given their walking papers when they are not; and (2) that there was no light duty work available when Soxette was terminated, then I think that they may be and should be in the clear.

 

If there are light duty positions available now, they should have given her one, given the ad hoc policy you described, and are not and should not be in the clear.

 

What will be interesting to see is whether any light duty positions are filled in Soxette's absence. If so, I think her employer is screwed, and rightfully so.

 

There are light duty positions available.I was given a signed statement by a career employee today.She is 4 months pregnant with her third child,and is on light duty.She started as a casual at the post office and was hired with the PO knowing she was pregnant.She was given a light duty assignment back then.The EEO guy has the statement.She later became a career employee when her test score was reached during a hiring period.