![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Robert M. Gary" wrote in message om... (Sam) wrote in message . com... As far as I know, there are no FBOs in the U.S. that have CFI's as employees. We are almost always "1099" not "W-2". I think this helps divorse the liability of having employees. I am an employee of PAVCO as a CFI and get a W-2. A lot of places that claim that their instructors are 'independent' contractors are asking to get bitten by their state labor regulators. Some states allow anyone who claims that they are a contractor to be treated as one, but some others get downright nasty. There is no liability protection in having contractors instead of employees. It is a tax and labor issue. Employers have to pay employer taxes for their employees and withhold income taxes and deposit them on a regular basis. They have to pay their employees minimum wage. They have to pay their employees for all work they do. Both states and the federal government take a dim view of businesses that attempt to evade taxes and labor laws by calling their employees 'independent' contractors. If a CFI was really an independent contractor he could not be required to perform any additional duties, could not be told how to do his job, could not be required to use company planes, could not be forbidden to give flight instruction on his own time or at other FBOs, etc. Some states require anyone working as a contractor to have a license or otherwise register as a business. The first time a 'contractor' CFI gets hurt on the job and files a workman's compensation claim (or even inadvertently admits to hospital personnel that he was injured on the job) then the state is going to come looking for back taxes, penalties, interest, and a real good reason why this CFI should not be eligible for compensation at the employer's expense. A good argument can be made that calling your instructors contractors actually increases your liability exposure a great deal. Employees are easier to insure and much easier to manage. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
If a CFI was really an independent contractor he could not be required to perform any additional duties, could not be told how to do his job, could not be required to use company planes, could not be forbidden to give flight instruction on his own time or at other FBOs, etc. Some states require anyone working as a contractor to have a license or otherwise register as a business. I'm pretty sure that isn't true. I work in the teleco industry and about 25% of us (engineers) are contractors. You would never know the difference just walking around the cubes. The contractors are still told how to do their job just like employees. They are still required to use the same equipment. They do not have to be ind. businesses (we operate in almost every state and over 30 countries). They are still forbidden from working for anyone else during their contract. The company has 6 lawyers dedicated to preventing the state from considering these guys as employees (there are some strange things they do to maintain the difference). -Robert |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote
If a CFI was really an independent contractor he could not be required to perform any additional duties, could not be told how to do his job, could not be required to use company planes, could not be forbidden to give flight instruction on his own time or at other FBOs, etc. I am an independent contractor at an FBO. I don't get a W2 or 1099. I meet all the above tests. The FBO does not pay me - I am responsible for finding my own students, doing my own billing, etc. The student pays the FBO for the aircraft, and pays me for instruction in a completely separate transaction. I set my own rates. All instructors there work on the same basis. There are operations that do it right. I estimate these comprise less than 5% of all FBO's. The first time a 'contractor' CFI gets hurt on the job and files a workman's compensation claim ... It doesn't even require that. All it really takes is one disgruntled fired flight instructor filing for unemployment. If the state labor board decides he doesn't meet the definition of independent contractor (and most don't), watch out. The argument that he knew what the deal was up front doesn't fly - the reason labor law exists in the first place is that the employer is understood to have much more power in the situation than the employee. Personally, I would love to see these laws enforced against FBO's. It would lead to a much better business climate. Michael |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
A lot of places that claim that their instructors are 'independent' contractors are asking to get bitten by their state labor regulators. Some states allow anyone who claims that they are a contractor to be treated as one, but some others get downright nasty. State labor regulators? I'd be a lot more concerned about the IRS. A few years ago they started cracking down on employers who claimed their employees were independent contractors, in order to avoid payroll taxes. Some FBOs that I know of treat their instructors as true independent contractors, while others have gone the employee route. It depends on how the FBO is run. John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Got burned - Don't go to Lansing Jet Center. | Jon Kraus | Piloting | 57 | December 14th 03 06:39 PM |