SPUG: It's in the pod, really. Re: JOB:...
m3047 at inwa.net
Sat Dec 29 11:10:58 PST 2007
Why does it always seem that stuff like this comes over the wire on the
weekend? I looked in the posting headers to see if there was additional admin
information, but there was nothing different than the spug-list. I recognize
that Andrew sent this message.
Don't we have guidelines for job/contract postings? With Tim among other
notables at least at one time pushing for Perl certification (my objection:
it always seems to cost money or end up being who you know, and it's hard to
say what value it represents to a customer or what the cost/benefit ratio is
to the certificate holder... oh I know, I know: "sell the dream"), it seems
to me that people ought to recognize that one of the first tenets of
I<ethics> is that people representing that they are in business ought to be
registered as businesses, and that so-called professionals and their
customers who disagree ought not to cheat on their taxes... which is what
"independent contractors (wink-wink, nudge-nudge)" amounts to.
Do we need a talk on what it takes to be a licensed business in the State of
Washington, and how to look up whether your customers or vendors are properly
licensed (most of that is on-line these days and doesn't cost anything and
takes just minutes with a web browser)?
They've been looking for someone for this position for a while; I went to sort
of a "pre bid conference" on Oct. 4th of this year; there were three of us
attending. I left early given that it was Windows and well...
On the plus side, the description of the duties and environment has improved
markedly with this posting. W-2 is now an option as well.
On Friday 28 December 2007 17:46, SPUG Jobs wrote:
> - initially a contract position, but could turn into a
> permanent position
> - duration is ongoing.
> - no stock options; medical and dental benefits paid by company.
> - Placement is directly through our company
> - W-2 if permanent; 1099 if contract.
> - No restrictions on 1099 status
> - Primary business: Municipal codes.
They had an employee (my understanding was that they had primarily other
duties but did some Perl hacking on the side) who originally set this up.
They wanted a contractor back then, to the best of my recollection W-2 was
not an option. They didn't want to pay the overhead associated with someone
having their own business. The work is under their direction, on their
equipment, and on their site... at least initially. They don't want to listen
to professional advice (at least my advice): they're happy with the way
things are and want them to stay the same. (I'm not mentioning this because
they aren't entitled to that opinion or that prospects or even customers
aren't entitled to disagree with my recommendations; I'm mentioning it to
establish that the work is under their direction and control.) I didn't get
the impression that they were going to verify people's business registration
A company which publishes municipal codes ought to know better, methinks: "W-2
if permanent; 1099 if contract"? What does that mean?
Fred Morris Consulting, a *licensed* business since 1984
"..but if you want to tell me what to do, it's W-2"
More information about the spug-list