This morning there was an article in the Burlington Free Press about Bonny Dutton, who owns a business that sells sweaters, fleece tops, and hats for children through craft shows and her website, Fleece on Earth.
Dutton contracts with knitters in the state, who knit her products using her patterns and yarn at their own locations. The state is pursuing back unemployment taxes. Dutton insists that the knitters are independent contractors. The State Supreme Court heard arguments last week and will make the final decision.
From Dutton’s point of view, the people she contracts are independent. They own their own knitting machines. They set their own hours. They work from their homes and do not receive any supervision from her.“I’m using two knitters in St. Johnsbury. I’ve never been to where they work. I’ve never seen where they work,” Dutton said.
It doesn’t make sense to her that she could be responsible for an insurance claim if one of the workers were hurt while contract knitting for her in a place she’s never even seen. While this case is not about workers’ compensation, if Dutton had employees she would be required to carry such insurance.
Dutton says that she will likely use contractors from outside Vermont if she looses. Her business is not in the position to open a knitting factory.
Of course the article quotes some workers’ rights activist who is “very happy to see the state of Vermont is doing something about this.”
Yeah, if I was a self-proclaimed expert on what employment situations others will benefit the most from, I too would be happy that the state is driving out employment – especially if it was a type of employment that addresses a need for flexible hours and ability to work from home.
Take someone in my situation. I am a stay-at-home mom that homeschools. This kind of gig would be great for me, if my knitting was better. I could work when I was able to, from my own home. In fact, that is really the only kind of job I could have.
To me, this is clearly a problem with the law. Years ago, when I was a single mom, I used to do candle parties for PartyLite. I was considered an independent consultant. I filed a self-employment form with my tax return and was responsible for my own taxes. I was not an employee of the company, even though they provided me with training, materials, and a big binder of guidelines I had to follow. The provided the products, they set the prices, they set the code of conduct. It sounds an awful lot like I was an employee, but they had no responsibility for me and I had no accountability to them, other than to represent their product according to their standards. It was win-win for me and them.
Why should this knitting situation be handled any different?
These kinds of opportunities are needed and the state should not stand in the way of people making arrangements that fit their lifestyle. The government should encourage prosperity for individuals, not hinder it.
When a person is self-employed, they bear the responsibility for themselves if they are injured or their business dries up. There is no “unemployment compensation.” Why then can’t these knitters take that same risk for themselves?
This is a perfect example of why the government should have less regulatory control over businesses and why “workers rights” special interest groups should not be able to use the law for their own social engineering agenda.
The entire Free Press article can be read here – but only for a week.
