- 10 -
completed. The condominium renovation required tile work.
Accordingly petitioner’s job was an integral part of DBMA’s work.
Based on the record before us, the integral nature of
petitioner’s work could suggest employee status. This, however,
is but one factor that must be weighed among the others.
6. Permanency of the Relationship
A transitory work relationship may point toward independent
contractor status. Herman v. Express Sixty-Minutes Delivery
Serv., Inc., 161 F.3d 299, 305 (5th Cir. 1998). If, however, the
worker works in the course of the employer’s trade or business,
the fact that he does not work regularly is not necessarily
significant. Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc. v. United States, 503
F.2d 423, 430 (2d Cir. 1974) (transients may be employees); Kelly
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-140 (working for a number of
employers during a tax year does not necessitate treatment as an
independent contractor). In considering the permanency of the
relationship, we must also consider the principal’s right to
discharge the worker and the worker’s right to quit at any time.
DBMA contracted petitioner to work on the condominium
renovation and paid petitioner for the job he performed,
regardless of the amount of time petitioner spent on the work.
Petitioner worked for approximately 16 days, from August through
December 2003, on the condominium renovation and received 14
checks from DBMA for his work. Although petitioner stated that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007