Independent Contractors Versus Employees Sample Clauses

Independent Contractors Versus Employees. Generally speaking, enforceable agreements to limit an employee’s entitlements to the minimum standards set out in provincial employment legislation will be upheld. However, one area where the parties’ respective intentions and characterizations will be of little consequence to the court is with respect to the nature of the employment relationship and, specifically, the distinction between an employee and an independent contractor. Broadly speaking, an independent contractor is an individual who provides ser- vices for a company without being an employee of same. Independent contractors ultimately work for themselves. Thus, many of them are self-incorporated, but this is far from being a definitive confirmation that the individual will not be legally consid- ered to be an employee. In fact, whether an individual will be legally characterized as an employee or an independent contractor is entirely dependent on the factual nexus of the working relationship as a whole and has very little to do with what an individual calls himself or what the company wishes to characterize him as. Even the case law is fairly broad and unhelpful in this regard, pointing employment counsel in the direc- tion of considerations of vague notions like “control” and “integration.” It is gener- ally considered to be the case that where an individual is “integrated” within the company and exercises very little “control” over his work, that individual is consid- ered to be an employee. Ultimately, this is still far too simplistic an analysis, given the multitude of factors that ultimately must be considered in assessing whether or not someone is an employee, including the following: • chance for profit/risk of loss; • the provision of a company uniform/business cards/office space/office supplies; • the provision of tools to complete the services contracted for;