all of this is entirely within the scope of the contract.
"subcontracting" is unlikely to be permissible in a variety of scenarios, especially if the material being worked on is even vaguely sensitive.
when it does happen, it's typically in a larger organizational context and then there will usually be some vetting or approval process.
Personally, I wouldn’t talk too loudly about how I want contractors to behave like employees.
You don’t get to enforce when and where a contractor works. They can perhaps agree to it to keep a good relationship, but they are not obligated, and if they change their mind the only thing you can do is fire them.
You also don’t get to choose how they do their job. If they agreed to do something for a given price, they can do it how they see fit, even hiring a subcontractor. Don’t like it? Don’t hire them.
If you want control of both of those things, you want an employee. Now, there’s plenty of contractors that will behave like employees for you, if it gets their foot in the door, but if the IRS finds out you could be in trouble.
Where do you work?
So, if I want to contract Beyonce to sing at my wedding, I need to make her my employee or she can legally send someone else to do it?
thanks, but i'm hoping for something more specific. like a us code or something. i'm skeptical that you're speaking to something that actually exists, but i'm happy to see evidence of what you're talking about.
> You don’t get to enforce when and where a contractor works.
i'm not sure what you mean by "enforce" exactly, other than perhaps you mean to say a contract is not allowed to stipulate that, for example, a contractor work during the day to coordinate with others, or work on-site to handle materials in a secure location, or not hand privileged or sensitive data over to unknown random people.
> Where do you work?
at a large company that has both employees and contractors.
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
your link even notes:
> There is no “magic” or set number of factors that “makes” the worker an employee or an independent contractor, and no one factor stands alone in making this determination. Also, factors which are relevant in one situation may not be relevant in another.
to me it makes zero sense to hire a vetted contractor who can then just toss say, classified data, over to some unknown random. it's a completely untenable proposition.
In the example above with NDAs and security clearance that can be a perfectly valid requirement, but you can't reasonably be upset if the contractor subcontracts out to someone else with clearance who has signed the same NDA
All of that is solely to get around to requirements with hiring employees like providing benefits, or needing to pay for increased payroll taxes when the company decides to lay a bunch of people off.
It's not right just because the rule of law has degraded so much that the government no longer enforces their own rules