- 19 -
particular performance of his job. He relied on his own methods
for recruiting, the only control being over the language of the
advertisements that he placed. He decided who would be hired
and, in fact, used stricter qualifications to select insurance
agents than Combined itself required. He trained insurance
agents in his own way, following only the broad outlines of the
training course.
Moreover, he was responsible for most of his own business
expenses. He paid for half the advertising and travel costs and
all of his remaining expenses, including a secretary, office
equipment, and supplies. There was a risk he could lose money.
He, in fact, did have net losses for some of the months in which
he worked. Respondent argues that he never had a loss at the end
of any year; the fact that he was successful does not mean he was
an employee rather than an independent contractor. Since he was
primarily compensated by means of override commissions on his
agents’ sales, his remuneration depended upon his skill at
managing this sales force effectively and efficiently. Because
Combined ceded to petitioner the ability to substantially affect
his agents' compensation (by giving them routes offering greater
or lesser remunerative opportunities), petitioner, not Combined,
had substantial effective control over the agents within his
supervision.
Petitioner also sold insurance to a limited extent.
Respondent makes much of the scripted sales talk that petitioner
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011