No announcement yet.

New York unemployment law question

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New York unemployment law question

    I was a 1099 employee for almost all of 2007 and swiched not by choice
    to a w2 employee sometime in October of 2007.
    Employment with this company recently terminatd and an
    unemployment claim was filed and approved. my question is in the
    monetary benifet determination my ex-employer is not reporting my income
    from 7/01 2007 to 9/30/2007 showing .00 for that basic base quarter
    forcing a very low average within an alternate quarter. is this legal? I
    was never told I was to be a contract employee nor does it state that
    within my contract for employment. Does my ex-employer need to report
    that income to the department of labor? thank you for your time in
    review I look forward to hearing from someone.

  • #2
    The original premise is wrong. You are either an employee (W-2) or an independent contractor (1099). There is no such thing as a 1099 employee.

    If you didn't meet the criteria for IC status and you should have been treated as an employee all along, then yes, the employer was in violation of the law by misclassifying you. Your first hint in that first three months should have been that you weren't having any taxes withheld.

    The notice of financial eligiblity should include the procedure for appealing the calculation and you should do that.
    I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.


    • #3
      unemployment question pt.2

      PattyMD, Would you happen to know what the general outline for an IC is??
      And back to my original question would this employer not be required to report income durring this time frame to the dept of labor? I was classified as an outside sales agent for this company if that helps.


      • #4,00.html

        Whether or not the wages should have been reported for the first three months is going to depend on whether you were originally misclassified. My guess is that the company would not have converted you to employee status if you legitimately could have remained an independent contractor, since employee status means the employer has additional costs relative to your employment.
        I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.


        • #5
          Thanks for the link PattyMD ill check it out ASAP. Any further suggestion's?


          • #6
            Come back and post to this thread after you review that article. You know more about the details of your work than we do.
            I don't respond to Private Messages unless the moderator specifically refers you to me for that purpose. Thank you.


            • #7
              Will do. Thank you.


              • #8
                PattyMD, I had an opportunity to read over the link you sent me it was very helpful thank you. As it turns out I was employed by my former employer as a 1099 IC however I was never paid anything for services rendered, other than the commission splits that were agreed upon, within the contract signed
                I also agreed to a no compete clause witch now seems a little contradictory, I know this was enforced with strong threats of termination never received any kind of draw even after I was switched to W2
                I was classified as a loan originator for a mortgage broker if that helps you.
                And as far as this employer knowing he's has done something wrong... that being the reason for switching me to w2...I think you are right on the money with that, shortly after communication with you today I simply reached out to the office manager through email to try to get a couple of answers and promptly got a response from the owner....mainly a witless rant however at the end stated and I quote "If you want to negotiate something reasonable I can do that...but
       made money here the first 5 months, and I did pay you a
                draw..." Not a true statement in the least... I'm left a little perplexed?...any thoughts?


                • #9
                  also note I was always treated as an employee held to production standards if I did not meet such standards I was paid less on a commission scale.