po'd at my competition since they have no workmans comp and dont with hold

[kf_tree]

how come everyone whines and worry's about the other guy, instead of looking at their own business to see what they can change or improve. no one here has ever had a job off the book's?

when you go into a deli to buy lunch do you ask if their paying the employee's on the books before you order? what about the dishwasher in restaurants, car wash employee's, etc. do you guy's report them? what about the area's where illeagal's congregate.........do you call imigration? when someone rolls through a stop sign, do you run to a cop? compareing rape or burglury to paying tax's is kind of a far stretch.

it is how you seperate yourselves from them that make's you stand out. makeing that leap to paying comp is tough, i know i've been there. but it also enables to get jobs for clients that those guys will never get. we do work for a ton of management co's , rr's, schools etc because we have the right ins. the city will not issue permits to prune city tree's unless you have the right ins. there are alot of "sweet" jobs those guys will never see. so let them bid cheap on the big removals, at least you know where they be for a couple of days when you could have done the job in one day.

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

Its hard for me to rat on somebody

It's not "ratting" to report wrongdoing! That STUPID attitude has allowed more scumbags to cheat people than any other!

That is a criminal's attitude!

 

[treeseer]

i say call it in. if they arent paying whats required to legally do business then they can bid lower than the legit guys and that lowers the average price in the whole area

I also say call it in, but Stumper's got the best plan--Improve your services and beat them on knowledge and quality. I keep raising my hourly rate and still am under the uncertified competition, and blow them out of the water on competence.

I totally agree with my good friend skwerl--few government actions work to improve quality. Mostly they add work for bureaucrats and headaches for everyone else. Good ordinances fairly administered can lead to good results, but they are rare.

 

[trimmmed]

how come everyone whines and worry's about the other guy, instead of looking at their own business to see what they can change or improve. no one here has ever had a job off the book's?

when you go into a deli to buy lunch do you ask if their paying the employee's on the books before you order? what about the dishwasher in restaurants, car wash employee's, etc. do you guy's report them? what about the area's where illeagal's congregate.........do you call imigration? when someone rolls through a stop sign, do you run to a cop? compareing rape or burglury to paying tax's is kind of a far stretch.

it is how you seperate yourselves from them that make's you stand out. makeing that leap to paying comp is tough, i know i've been there. but it also enables to get jobs for clients that those guys will never get. we do work for a ton of management co's , rr's, schools etc because we have the right ins. the city will not issue permits to prune city tree's unless you have the right ins. there are alot of "sweet" jobs those guys will never see. so let them bid cheap on the big removals, at least you know where they be for a couple of days when you could have done the job in one day.

Very well said Ken.

 

[kayakvt]

how come everyone whines and worry's about the other guy, instead of looking at their own business to see what they can change or improve. no one here has ever had a job off the book's?

when you go into a deli to buy lunch do you ask if their paying the employee's on the books before you order? what about the dishwasher in restaurants, car wash employee's, etc. do you guy's report them? what about the area's where illeagal's congregate.........do you call imigration? when someone rolls through a stop sign, do you run to a cop? compareing rape or burglury to paying tax's is kind of a far stretch.

it is how you seperate yourselves from them that make's you stand out. makeing that leap to paying comp is tough, i know i've been there. but it also enables to get jobs for clients that those guys will never get. we do work for a ton of management co's , rr's, schools etc because we have the right ins. the city will not issue permits to prune city tree's unless you have the right ins. there are alot of "sweet" jobs those guys will never see. so let them bid cheap on the big removals, at least you know where they be for a couple of days when you could have done the job in one day.

I agree in a lot of ways. It's not like rape, quality work and professionalism are important and SHOULD be the basis of competition within the industry, and no, I don't ask the kid behind the counter whether he's paid above the table or not...

BUT the "would you call a cop when you see someone roll through a stop sign" example is not apt. A more appropriate question would be "if someone smashed into my car and drove away would I call the cops?"

Hiring "under the table" hurts not only the guy's employees, but the whole industry... Wonder why WC rates are so high? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics more than half of the on the job injuries resulting in hospital care for uninsured workers are never compensated. This means that the hospitals have to pay it out of thier own pockets, jacking up the cost for you and I and for WC insurance companies...

Additionally, because they have a LOT less overhead to pay (no WC, often no liability insurance, no employer FICA contributions) they can underbid like crazy... This drives down the value of tree work and makes it even harder for legit operators.

I'm all for standing out based on professionalism and quality of work. But that's where tree companies should compete. Competition shouldn't be based on who is operating a legal, safe business and who is not... These guys are taking your money illegally.... Who wouldn't call that in?

 

[weimedog]

I had that problem when I was running a excavation/trucking business in Colorado...especially when trying to compete with farms using "AG" plates & insurance rates hauling the same road base & sand I was...DROP a dime.
Now I work for a municipality..a larger one. There are folks in this gov. business who have absolutly nothing else to do but chase down regulation "challenged" companies. (DOT can be like a hungry dog looking at a lamb chop when they get a tip..I know cause someone tryed to make my life tough once after they lost a bid..I was legal)

 

[jmack]

Any thoughts on what route to take for getting a city to implement (and then enforce) licensing for tree operations? There is none in my area, and I wonder if it would help.

Everybody has heard that you get what you pay for, but they always go with the cheap guy in the end. I actually had a lady call for an estimate and tell me, "I need your rock bottom price." I bid it fair, she accepted, signed a contract, and then called back a week later and cancelled because she got some toothless hoosier to do it cheaper. Beatch.

k,sawyer u might try a contract and a deposit to cover your gas. if somone calls ans says i need rockbottom tell them it wont be you, this usually sorts out the undecided and the shoppers.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

Why not consider taking out a contract [a hit] on them,I know a lowballer who'll do it cheaper than anyone else..........

 

[kf_tree]

Why not consider taking out a contract [a hit] on them,I know a lowballer who'll do it cheaper than anyone else..........

yea........but the last time i used that guy he only wounded him instead of finishing the job. so i had to hire someone else and it cost me more in the end.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

yea........but the last time i used that guy he only wounded him instead of finishing the job. so i had to hire someone else and it cost me more in the end.

Not another pain in the 'ASS' customer...

 

[jp hallman]

Mentioning subed out work. How do you know your competition isn't subbing out all his work? If the guys working with him are subs, then he doesn't have to with hold and pay taxes on them. He'd just 1099 em'.

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

The IRS has very definite rules about who are subs and who are not, and they don't care what you call them. If his "subs" meet their definition of employee, he's in deep doo-doo when the IRS catches up.

Oddly enough, they aren't fooled by the old "They aren't employees, they're CONTRACTORS!" routine.

 

[skwerl]

My interpretation of the 'subcontractor' law is three requirements. I have and use my own equipment, I have my own licenses and insurance, and I have to be able to set my own hours. I work for a couple guys who use subs exclusively and we have a great working relationship since everybody is responsible for their own phase of the job.

 

[Kate Butler]

subs

My interpretation of the 'subcontractor' law is three requirements. I have and use my own equipment, I have my own licenses and insurance, and I have to be able to set my own hours. I work for a couple guys who use subs exclusively and we have a great working relationship since everybody is responsible for their own phase of the job.

I don't know what it's like in other states, but in Vermont, if a person is doing work for another company that is work that they (the other company) would normally do, then that person is an employee and not a sub - no matter that they meet the other Federal requirements for being a sub. I found this out the hard way this past year.

So, if I (my company) normally does tree work, then I can't sub it out: I have to put that person or persons on the books. If I need some excavation done, something that I don't normally do, then I can sub that out.

Seems like just another way to fook the small businessperson who may need a few extra hands for a short time (or even just a single job).

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

My interpretation of the 'subcontractor' law is three requirements. I have and use my own equipment, I have my own licenses and insurance, and I have to be able to set my own hours. I work for a couple guys who use subs exclusively and we have a great working relationship since everybody is responsible for their own phase of the job.

From what I know, you probably meet the IRS guidelines just fine.

But I'd ask the IRS, not some guy on the Internet!


Sounds like Vermont stinks. Oh, yeah, that's right. You guys actually elected Dean!

 

[Stumper]

I don't know what it's like in other states, but in Vermont, if a person is doing work for another company that is work that they (the other company) would normally do, then that person is an employee and not a sub - no matter that they meet the other Federal requirements for being a sub. I found this out the hard way this past year.

So, if I (my company) normally does tree work, then I can't sub it out: I have to put that person or persons on the books. If I need some excavation done, something that I don't normally do, then I can sub that out.

Seems like just another way to fook the small businessperson who may need a few extra hands for a short time (or even just a single job).

That is utterly screwey. So the homebuilder can't sub another firm to do the drywall because he does drywall too when he doesn't have 6 jobs going? The 2nd firm's 3 employees become his employees for 4 days even though he didn't hire them and can't fire them except as a firm? What a crock. Maybe the Vermont legislature should all go hunting during the Pike rifle season and have a collective accident..... Oh wait that probably isn't a product of the legislature directly- probably administrative regulations conceived by some bureaucrat to make his "job" easier or ensure its continued existence. Gubiernos malditos!:angry2:

 

[kayakvt]

That is utterly screwey. So the homebuilder can't sub another firm to do the drywall because he does drywall too when he doesn't have 6 jobs going? The 2nd firm's 3 employees become his employees for 4 days even though he didn't hire them and can't fire them except as a firm? What a crock. Maybe the Vermont legislature should all go hunting during the Pike rifle season and have a collective accident..... Oh wait that probably isn't a product of the legislature directly- probably administrative regulations conceived by some bureaucrat to make his "job" easier or ensure its continued existence. Gubiernos malditos!:angry2:

It's a crap rule, and yes, it was a purely administrative law... It is changing, H.642 was passed last year (2004) and it changes the relationship between buisnesses and subs a bit, and it was clear that they (the legislature) will be improving it more... And the rule is applied differently depending on who is enforcing it. Working construction, we've NEVER had a problem subbing out things like drywall (though we did alot of drywall, but if a project is huge, a dedicated drywaller can do the work faster and cheaper than our team of carpenters)... I think that what the rule was *trying* to accomplish was to prevent a construction crew from hiring carpenters and calling them subs just to avoid paying WC... Then the rule was interpreted by the various scum-sucking middle-level beaurocrats who enforce it in about a thousand different ways, often leading crap enforcements (like what it sounds like happened to Kate).

Oh, and I believe fish shooting season is real short anyways... Just a few days if I remember... And the only guy I know who does it uses a shotgun with slugs... The idea is not to hit the fish, but to cause a concussion that will kill the fish...

 

[Kate Butler]

Well, this (to be hoped for) "improvement" can't come soon enough for me. So far, it's cost me 5 grand (and the jury's out on whether the Feds want in with "their" back taxes) for some people who only worked one day. Admittedly, some (3) worked much longer, but they ALL still had their own tools, transportation, and worked the times that suited them.

 

[kayakvt]

Well, this (to be hoped for) "improvement" can't come soon enough for me. So far, it's cost me 5 grand (and the jury's out on whether the Feds want in with "their" back taxes) for some people who only worked one day. Admittedly, some (3) worked much longer, but they ALL still had their own tools, transportation, and worked the times that suited them.

Yeah, it's an ugly rule and it gets played out in every state... While I've never had any problems to speak of, I know a LOT of people who have. The problem is that there are so many different reasons for using subs and so many different relationships between employers and employees and contractors and subs that there is no way for legalese to address them all...

I can't claim to have a solution for the problem, and likely there will never be a real good one, but I can see what it is they're trying to stop... I was (for about 9 months) a bike messenger in NYC... If you want to see abuse of subcontractor status, you needn't look further... I worked for a GREAT company (Breakaway) that hired everyone as employees and treated them fair, but MOST companies hire people as Indy Contractors, even though they carry no individual insurance, have specific hours to work, and are paid on commission at the end of every week... It's a real problem... Lots of guys (and girls) get squished and have no legal recourse as most companies are fly-by-night operations with no assets to go after... And most bike messengers are way hard up and don't understand the laws that could protect them... Dangerous, hard, bad work...

Oh, and the improvement isn't much of a REAL improvement, it's more of a good sign that the legislature took it upon themselves to change a bad administrative law... At least it's a sign that they recognize the problem... You can read the new law online at http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2004/bills/passed/H-632.HTM

Oh, and I was wrong earlier, it was h.632 not h.642...

And the part of particular interest to you would be Section 14 of the amended Vermont Statute 601 where it gets into "The term “worker” or “employee” does not include:"

 

[rfwoodvt]

I don't know what it's like in other states, but in Vermont, if a person is doing work for another company that is work that they (the other company) would normally do, then that person is an employee and not a sub - no matter that they meet the other Federal requirements for being a sub. I found this out the hard way this past year.

So, if I (my company) normally does tree work, then I can't sub it out: I have to put that person or persons on the books. If I need some excavation done, something that I don't normally do, then I can sub that out.

Seems like just another way to fook the small businessperson who may need a few extra hands for a short time (or even just a single job).

Hi Kate,

I've been working in Vermont since 1980 and have yet to see anywhere the state has claimed such a rule.

It may exist, but in 13 years of working almost exclusively with subs and having been in touch with Dept of Labor and Industry regularly to make sure I've been in compliance, it would seem that I should have run into something like that before now.

If it does exists can you offer the VSS statute number and section they cited cause I'm in a world of Sh_t if that rule is true.

They have always (the IRS too) led me to beleive that it all comes down to whether someone could be reasonalby considered an employee. That is most often determined by who controls exactly what, where, when and how a job is done.

If you can tell them where, when and how then they are an employee. If they essentially can tell you then they are a sub. This should not be confused, however, with coordinating schedules, like having a stumper come in AFTER you finish but before a deadline or having a rigging crew, debris hauler and your people work the same property at the same time.

Also, successful defense of SUBC status should include an executed contract which includes stated penalties for breach.

If employees screw up they get fired...if SUBs screw up they get fined.

Also, if you are thier sole client, it does take on more of an appearance of emplyee/employer relationship.

This just emphasizes all the more that if someones wants to be a sub they should create a stand-alone entity for thier business structure such as an S corp, C corp, Partnership or LLC.

Of course the burden of proof (tho in my mind unconstitutional) sits in our lap and not the IRS or DLI. We have to prove our innocense with evidence and argument. They only have to make the charge. If we fail to prove our case it is a judgement against us. Definitely reverse of what it should be...we are guilty til proven innocent.

Please Kate, let me know what chapter and verse you were cited....I may need to overhaul my business.