EMPLOYEE--OR CONTRACTOR?

EMPLOYEE--OR CONTRACTOR?

Do some businesses classify workers as contractors to deny them benefits and avoid paying employment taxes? Or is this "independent contractor" status simply a way for companies to render workers more productive and entrepreneurial? In response to our story about employment practices at FedEx ("They're Employees. No, They're Not," What's Next, Nov. 16), readers took up positions on both sides of the debate.

Who can blame employers for wanting contractors instead of employees? Here are just a few of the things companies face today: unemployment taxes, retirement plan upkeep, 401(k) plan upkeep, medical plan upkeep, EEOC regulations, FICA tax, age-discrimination regulations, and so on. While some of these laws serve a good purpose, they also create a sense of entitlement with some employees and kill productivity.

Screen name: Contractor

C'mon--if I have to wear the FedEx uniform, start and end when they tell me to, deliver what and how they tell me to, I should be considered an employee. I deserve workers' compensation insurance, unemployment insurance, and coverage under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act.

Screen name: Mike

All publicly held companies want to do business in a middle-class society, but fewer and fewer want to pay middle-class wages.

Screen name: DSW

Companies have been abusing this model for years. It should be federal law that contractors be hired as full-time employees after a year.

Screen name: Annoying Troll