As indicated in the article, I suspect it'll be argued that the vineyards' main business and the truckers' main business are different. For us, it could also be argued that our main business function is different from a title/escrow co or a signing service. A ss functions more like an agency that hires temps and we do loan signings and other notary work. And I agree with Steve that most of us work for multiple companies.
I also think the key is going to be "serving several..." and "directing their tasks". One thing that *could* be a positive outcome of this new law is the latter issue. If ss's get worried about the risk of having to treat notaries as employees, they might decide to back off some of the micro-managing that could be interpreted as "directing their tasks". In turn, that MIGHT lead to them deciding to take more care with whom - and how - they hire. I don't know how likely that is, though, because for most of this state, there's still an over-supply of notaries vs. volume of work.
It'll be interesting to see if this new law does what it's intended to do or if it ends up with the unintended consequences being worse than the correction. I do know that many companies abuse the use of ICs.
For example, back before I became a notary, I worked in the cubicle next to another woman who was doing a job that was very similar, if not essentially the same, as what I did. But she was hired as an IC, and worked there in that capacity for well over a year. The bill from the agency she worked for came across my desk, so I knew she was working for a lot less than me, without any benefits (and the latter where pretty significant for that company). I never discussed specifics with her but did mention it in generalities. She was afraid to rock the boat, so she never said anything.
I guess it comes back to the same old thing we're always talking about here... That if we allow ourselves to put up with poor treatment and being taken advantage of, there will generally be someone willing to oblige.
|