"Volunteer Status"

[Taxing Matters]

They are employees. But they have individual contracts (not at-will).

Doesn't matter that they have contracts for some set period of time and thus are not at will. The federal minimum wage laws still apply just the same.

They are bona fide employees earning an annual salary of $1 per year as agreed upon in their signed contracts.

And unless they are teachers actually teaching for the work they do the school district still must pay them that minimum pay that the law requires. Just because some school districts do this does not make it legal. If you think that just an employer does something it must mean it's legal then you don't know the world of employment very well. There are lots of instances of employers screwing up on labor law.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Not following you.

You want to collect unemployment.

UI is meant for people who and unemployed and ACTIVELY seeking a job.

You want to turn down payment so you can feel good about "volunteering" and still collect unemployment.

And then there all these CEOs who have $1 salaries.

https://thehustle.co/1-ceo-salary/

AND THEY ARE NOT COLLECTING UNEMPLOYMENT.

If you are willing to forgo unemployment pay then you too can have the luxury of working for nothing.
If you obtain gainful employment, then working your side gig for $1 is possible.
If you win/inherit enough money to live out without needing supplemental money, then what you want is possible.

 

[Dale Sr]

Well, when you become the CEO of a major corporation, you too can look into the benefits of donating your salary. (You didn't read that article through to the end, did you?) Until then, the Fair Labor Standards Act does not permit you to be an employee at a dollar a year.

Not that I think you're going to pay any attention to anything that doesn't conform to your intent.

I read the full article, as well as other and there clearly are cases where execs forgo salary (including stock option) for various reasons.

I will talk to the solicitor again and specifically mention the concerns tiur have raised. I suppose it is possible that technically you are right, but despite the violation the practice of employing people for $1 is still common. If no-one complains about the $1 salary to the DoL, I bet it would never even be noticed.

 

[cbg]

It is not only possible that technically I am right - I am right.. If you want to be an independent contractor at a dollar a year that's your business, but then you're not an employee and the whole point of the exercise is to make you an employee. An employee must be paid minimum wage times hours worked or the employer is in violation of the law.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/faq

Pay close attention to the second question from the bottom. Note that "schools" are specifically included as being applicable to minimum wage.

If you've got the rafts of tax attorneys and accountants and suchlike who can turn all kinds of tricks to ensure that you're only paid a dollar a year on the books but you still take home millions you too can be the CEO of an international corporation. Somehow I don't think that's the case with you.

 

[Dale Sr]

This may be the case. What the solicitor said is that is done all the time locally (in schools and local municipalities). He did not say AND IT'S legal. he just said it was very common.....That being the case, it would seem that this not a law that the DoL enforces which is not surprising bc I doubt they are out looking for people wanting to work for a dollar/yr and forcing them to be paid more or laid off. And I cannot see who would make a stink about it and report it to the DoL.

 

[Dale Sr]

It is not only possible that technically I am right - I am right.. If you want to be an independent contractor at a dollar a year that's your business, but then you're not an employee and the whole point of the exercise is to make you an employee. An employee must be paid minimum wage times hours worked or the employer is in violation of the law.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/faq

Pay close attention to the second question from the bottom. Note that "schools" are specifically included as being applicable to minimum wage.

If you've got the rafts of tax attorneys and accountants and suchlike who can turn all kinds of tricks to ensure that you're only paid a dollar a year on the books but you still take home millions you too can be the CEO of an international corporation. Somehow I don't think that's the case with you.

Why does Independent Contractor keep getting mentioned? It is not relevant to the discussion. It is not something under consideration.

As for my personal finances and professional accountants and lawyers available to me, CBG, that's none of your business, but I am quite sure that both my personal balance sheet and income over the last 10 years are well above someone who take a simple legal question and turn it into a personal attack in a public forum (insecure much)?

 

[cbg]

IC's are being mentioned because THAT is the method by which you can legally work for a dollar a year.

If you think anything here qualifies as a personal attack, I wonder who's the insecure one here. Being right (and I provided the proof) and standing on that is not a personal attack OR evidence of insecurity. It's confidence in knowing your job.

 

[Dale Sr]

You want to collect unemployment.

UI is meant for people who and unemployed and ACTIVELY seeking a job.

You want to turn down payment so you can feel good about "volunteering" and still collect unemployment.



AND THEY ARE NOT COLLECTING UNEMPLOYMENT.

If you are willing to forgo unemployment pay then you too can have the luxury of working for nothing.
If you obtain gainful employment, then working your side gig for $1 is possible.

I will be ACTIVELY seeking employment. If I find suitable work, my employment with the school would cease.

The question of the legality of a $1/yr salary is independent of the UE situation. And clearly many people do work for $1/yr salaries (whether that be legal or not).

If you are willing to forgo unemployment pay then you too can have the luxury of working for nothing.

OK, so you do believe working for $1 (or nothing) is legal.

 

[Dale Sr]

IC's are being mentioned because THAT is the method by which you can legally work for a dollar a year.

If you think anything here qualifies as a personal attack, I wonder who's the insecure one here. Being right (and I provided the proof) and standing on that is not a personal attack OR evidence of insecurity. It's confidence in knowing your job.

Somehow I don't think that's the case with you.

Using the word "you" in a derogatory statement is a personal attack. No reason to make things personal.

I have already stated that the functions that the district wants me to perform REQUIRE me to be an EMPLOYEE. I cannot change school policy. Please, drop the irrelevant IC narrative.

 

[Zigner]

You, sir, are a peach...bless your soul and have a magical day.