Can an independent contractor sign a legally binding contract for the entity that he/

[Accountrep]

What is the name of your state? California

Background:


I was recruited to be an account representative, on a commission basis, as an independent contractor with a company that I will refer to as T.

I was recruited by an individual who I will refer to as G.

G showed me a business card with the title "manager" - actually "District Manager."

I assumed that G was an employee of T in a managerial capacity.

I signed the independent contractor agreement with T and G signed it as a "manager" on behalf of T. The language states "on behalf of T by G, manager."

My commission checks were paid from a bank account owned by G, labeled commission account.

I subsequently found out that G is an independent contractor too, not an employee.

I am paid a percentage of the commissions that G receives from T.

T sometimes uses the term "District Sales Agent" to refer to G and Sales Agent to refer to me.

T sometimes uses the term "District Manager" to refer to G, but not in any document that appears to be a legally binding contract.

In fact, G "reports" to L who is an independent contractor labeled "Regional Sales Agent" or sometimes "Regional Manager."

Therefore, G appears to be one-step removed from T.

My independent contractor agreement has a attachment S that shows the commission schedule. I signed the schedule as did G on behalf of T as a manager.

I have been paid commissions in accordance with that schedule S.

The company T has posted the commission schedule W on its website for all sales representatives/independent contractors to see.

The commissions on the schedule W on the company's website are different (higher) than the commissions on the schedule S.

Therefore, although I have been paid commissions consistent with S they are lower than the schedule W, which is I assume what T intends to pay its sales agents.

G made me sign W, but would not let me keep a copy of it. G did this because T requires a file copy with my signature.

I was not aware of the "tiering" of independent contractors until recently, i.e., the relationship between L and G, and that L is an independent contractor too.

G made me sign another document P, representing T as a manager, but it does not appear to be an official document of T that speaks to a performance guarantee. I say that this is not an official document of T because it does not appear on T's website of all business forms. P lays out certain conditions for the payment of performance bonuses including the requirement to attend certain meetings to turn over sales documentation in order to qualify for bonuses.

G made me sign another document B, representing T as a manager, which is different from an equivalent document that appears on the T's website. The intention of B is to make up the difference between S and W if specific criteria for levels of sales are met.

G has given me another document F to review, which lays out criteria for a promotion to a new position and an increase in commission. These criteria include the requirements to train other independent contractors and attend various meetings.

Questions:

1. Under what circumstances, if any, can G legally represent T?
2. Can G use the term "manager" if he is not an employee, but is an independent contractor?
3. G appeared to me by virtue of the use of the term "manager" that he is an employee, until I subsequently found out that he isn't - what are the ramifications of that appearance?
4. I am annoyed that the schedule on S is lower than W - I signed P without knowing that W existed - what are the ramifications of that, especially given the G signed for T?
5. I have not achieved the requirements of B, which I believe are too difficult for someone coming in with no experience - therefore, in effect I was paid a lower level of commissions, according to S than I would according to W.
6. Do any of the documents: P, B or F suggest that an employment situation exists because of the requirements to attend certain meetings?
7. What is my recourse if T pays commissions to G, but for whatever reason, G does not pay commissions to me in accordance with S?
8. What is my recourse to get G or T to pay commissions in accordance with W?
9. Is there anything else that appears to be a problem in this structure?

 

[divgradcurl]

1. Under what circumstances, if any, can G legally represent T?

T can give G whatever authority they want.

2. Can G use the term "manager" if he is not an employee, but is an independent contractor?

Sure, if T says it's okay for G to hold him or herself out as a manager. There's no requirement that a manager be an actual employee of a company.

3. G appeared to me by virtue of the use of the term "manager" that he is an employee, until I subsequently found out that he isn't - what are the ramifications of that appearance?

There is no relevance to this at all.

4. I am annoyed that the schedule on S is lower than W - I signed P without knowing that W existed - what are the ramifications of that, especially given the G signed for T?

It all depends on the relationship between G and T. If T has given G authority to hire subcontractors, then that's just the way it is -- you are a subcontractor for G. Now, if G was NOT authorized by T to hire subs, that could be an issue, but it's an issue between G and T, not you and T.

You said yourself that you were hired under schedule S, so nobody was pulling wool over your eyes. Just because others in the organization are paid more or differently from you is irrelevant -- you are being paid what you agreed to work for.

5. I have not achieved the requirements of B, which I believe are too difficult for someone coming in with no experience - therefore, in effect I was paid a lower level of commissions, according to S than I would according to W.

And? What is your question?

6. Do any of the documents: P, B or F suggest that an employment situation exists because of the requirements to attend certain meetings?

Whether or not you are correctly classed as an independent contract of not under California law requires looking at a lot of different issues, not just whether you have to go to meetings or not -- there are like 40 factors the Department of Fair Employment and Housing considers when making this determination. You could contact the DFEH for a determination.

7. What is my recourse if T pays commissions to G, but for whatever reason, G does not pay commissions to me in accordance with S?

Depends on what authority G has to deviate from S.

8. What is my recourse to get G or T to pay commissions in accordance with W?

Again, depends on the relationship between G and T.

9. Is there anything else that appears to be a problem in this structure?

I don't necessarily see anything wrong to begin with. G may very well have the authority to hire subcontractors and pay them under a different schedule than prime contractors. It all depends on the relationship between T and G, and what authority T has given G.

 

[Accountrep]

Independent contractor - more information

Thank you for your response.

Some more information.

When I was hired by G, I thought that I was being contracted by T and actually signed a document that says so, which G has signed also.

I signed S and G has signed S. I signed W and G has signed W at a later date, thinking that W would supercede S since W has higher commission rates than S. I have not been allowed to have a copy of W and I am still being paid according to S.

I am actually confused as to whether I am contracted with T or G.

Thanks

 

[divgradcurl]

You just need to sit down and talk to the people involved, and figure out what your statuts is, and then if you aren't happy, try to renegotiate or move on. Even if you ARE a sub to T, they are NOT obligated to pay you the same as they pay other contractors -- from what you've written, you agreed to one rate, the fact that another rate exists in entirely inconsequential to YOUR position, whatever it may be. I'm not really sure what you are really asking, but probably your best course of action is just to sit down and find out exactly what's up, and then choose a plan of action accordingly.

All of this "I thought this" and "I thought that" is likely irrelevant -- you need to to figure out what the real situation is.