Author Question: Employee versus Independent Contractor. L.M.T. Steel Products, Inc, contracted with a school to ... (Read 188 times)

tsand2 · **on:** Jun 24, 2018

Employee versus Independent Contractor. L.M.T. Steel Products, Inc, contracted with a school to install numerous room partitions. To accomplish this work, L.M.T. hired a man named Webster. Webster was not a regular employee of L.M.T., and it was stipulated that he was to be paid by the number of feet of partitions installed. Webster did not have a contractor's license. He hired other workers to do the installing, and these workers were paid by L.M.T. Webster was given blueprints by L.M.T., but he was not otherwise at any time actively supervised by L.M.T. on the job. Needing to place a telephone call to L.M.T., Webster drove his own personal vehicle to a public telephone. On the way, he negligently collided with another car, and an occupant of that car, Peirson, was injured. Peirson sued L.M.T., claiming that Webster was an employee. L.M.T. claimed that Webster was an independent contractor. Who was correct? Explain.

Question 2

A principal may designate someone to do all acts that can be legally delegated to an agent. That agent is called a universal agent.
a. True
b. False
Indicate whether the statement is true or false

ilianabrrr · **Reply #1 on:** Jun 24, 2018

Answer to Question 1

Employee versus independent contractor
Peirson is correct. The court found Webster to be an employee of L.M.T. and not an inde-pendent contractor. The court held that one of the most significant factors in determining whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor is the employer's right to control the individual's work performance. It is not the manner in whichor how frequentlyan employer exercises this right but simply that the employer has the right to do so. In this situation, the jury found that Webster was hired as a foreman, and although Webster hired the other installers, these installers were paid by L.M.T. and were therefore employees of L.M.T. Based on these facts, the court found that L.M.T. had the right to control Webster's job performance as an employee of L.M.T.

Answer to Question 2

TRUE