upworthy

medicaid

Internet

Contractor refuses to attend 'mandatory' meetings, people support his reasoning

"You want me on the clock, pay me."

Photo credit: Canva

Contractor refuses to attend mandatory meetings, people applaud.

Contractors are vital parts of many company structures. They allow people to come in with a particular expertise for a specific period of time, while still allowing the person the flexibility to continue being their own boss. This dynamic is one significant factor that distinguishes contractors from employees. Employees are beholden to company policies, time clocks, and mandatory obligations, while contractors generally are not.

This distinction is exactly why one contractor went viral in 2022, and is currently going viral again after the old X post resurfaced. The man was asked why he didn't attend a mandatory daily meeting via text message. His response has people cheering and reminding employers that their contractors are not actual employees.

contractor; employee; contractor refuses meeting; w2 employee; contractor vs employee Team collaboration and brainstorming session at the office.Photo credit: Canva

An employer-employee relationship isn't one-sided. In exchange for adhering to everything the company mandates, the employee is offered health insurance, paid time off, and the employer pays into Social Security and Medicaid for that employee, among other things. Employees are also protected from things like wrongful termination and are eligible to receive disability and family medical leave. Contractors don't have those same benefits and protections, which makes being a contractor more flexible, but also more risky.

Unfortunately, the company working with this contractor received a harsh reality check when they demanded that he attend daily morning meetings. While the text exchange seemed to come off as unprofessional to some people, the overwhelming majority appreciated the contractor drawing a clear line in the sand.

contractor; employee; contractor refuses meeting; w2 employee; contractor vs employee Man focused on his phone outdoors in casual attire.Photo credit: Canva

"Hi Caleb," the initial text starts. "I was just informed you weren't on the morning stand up call this morning. How come?" Caleb's response was bluntly honest, replying, "Yeah dude I was asleep. I basically never join those." That's when the exchange takes a turn. The incoming message tells the contractor that those meetings are a "requirement for employment" at the company. Except that Caleb is not an employee, he's a contractor. After he points out that these meetings are not in his contract, the manager doubles down and even threatens the contractor with termination if he refuses to attend the meetings.

You can read the full exchange here:

Caleb clarifies in the comments that the person threatening to fire him is not even presiding over his department, nor does he work for the company that managed the contract.

A few fellow contractors chimed in with their own stories. One person walked away from a year-long contract just a few weeks in: "As a contractor, I once got fired for not following dress code for the client company. They didn't realize I was 3 weeks into a 1 year contract, and it was 1 week past the grace period. I wasn't going to go business professional while working in a server room."

Another shares, "I was doing freelance work I said, 'I won’t be here Wednesday or Thursday.' He said 'oh, now employees get to choose when they come to work?' I said 'I’m not your employee, you’re my client. And please smoke your cigars outside or I won’t be back at all.'"

contractor; employee; contractor refuses meeting; w2 employee; contractor vs employee Team debate heats up, leaving one member stressed.Photo credit: Canva

"A lot of employers literally don't know that calling someone a contractor, yet trying to control how and where they do their work, is tax fraud," someone else writes. "You control the details of how someone works (hours, meetings, etc)? Then you are their employer and must deduct taxes."

One person who works in human resources backed up the man's stance, writing, "Haha! I work in HR, and I can’t believe how often I have to explain to managers that they cannot require contractors to come to meetings, be available from 9-5, etc etc etc. You’re paying for the work, not ownership of their time."

contractor; employee; contractor refuses meeting; w2 employee; contractor vs employee Office debate: exchanging ideas with passion.Photo credit: Canva

In another post that shared the exchange, one person explains, "If employers miscategorize their W2 employees as 1099 to avoid payroll taxes, health insurance, and retirement benefits, then 'contractors' should absolutely refuse to show up as employees. By law, an employer cannot demand a 1099 contractor to work at a specific time. Good for this guy! If companies expect people to act like employees, pay them like employees. It's also illegal."

Someone else went directly to the point: "You want me on the clock, pay me."

From Your Site Articles
contractor vs employee
InternetPop Culture
More

Reminder: McConnell overcame polio as a kid with big help from the government.

Long before Mitch McConnell was attempting to dismantle the Affordable Care Act as majority leader of the U.S. Senate, he was fighting for his health as a small child growing up in Alabama — with help from the federal government and private donations.

When he was just 2 years old, McConnell was diagnosed with polio, Death and Taxes reported. As McConnell explained to his Senate colleagues in 2005, his mother had been "perplexed about what to do"; his father was serving overseas in World War II at the time, and — as these were the days before Medicaid or Medicare — health care options were limited. McConnell's mother worried her son might become disabled.

McConnell was fortunate to live a short drive away from Warm Springs, Georgia, where a polio rehab center had been established by President Roosevelt.

It was funded, in large part, through public efforts.

A child in bed recovering from polio in 1950. Photo by Douglas Grundy/Three Lions/Getty Images.

In the mid-1930s, roughly a decade before McConnell started receiving treatments at the center, Roosevelt's March of Dimes fundraising strategy for the center grew into a remarkable success. The president had asked Americans to send dimes to the White House in support of children living with polio, and within just one month, $268,000 (about $4.6 million today) had been raised. Kids like McConnell benefited greatly.

“We had left Warm Springs for the last time, and the physical therapist there had told my mother, 'Your son can walk now,'" an emotional McConnell told the Senate in 2005. "'We think he’s going to have a normal childhood and a normal life.'"

McConnell's health scare from seven decades ago —concerning a disease that's now eradicated in the U.S., no less — is incredibly relevant today.

Children who are in similar circumstances as McConnell once was — kids living with costly, threatening health ailments, whose family situations complicate their access to care — could be harmed greatly should the Republican leader's attempts to overturn the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) be successful.

Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images.

GOP senators are hovering around the 50-vote threshold to pass an alarmingly heartless bill that would strip Medicaid funding by billions of dollars — a move that'd disproportionately hurt the poor, the elderly, and the disabled. The overhaul would also allow states to drop certain benefits, like maternity care and mental health services, set in place by the Affordable Care Act.

Should the bill become law, wealthy Americans and drug companies — on the receiving end of massive tax breaks — would benefit greatly.

Anxieties over the bill's passage prompted dozens of demonstrators — many of whom were disabled and use wheelchairs — to protest the deep spending cuts outside McConnell's office on June 22.

In total, 43 were arrested. Many were forcibly removed.

"People with disabilities depend on Medicaid for our lives and for our liberty," Stephanie Woodward, one demonstrator who was arrested, explained in an interview.

A video of her chanting, "no cuts to Medicaid," as Capitol police carried her away from the senator's office quickly went viral in the protest's aftermath.

A lot has changed since McConnell's brush with polio in the 1940s, but the importance of valuing basic compassion in our health care system hasn't.

If anyone's experiences underline that, it's Senator McConnell's. Let him and every legislator know how you feel when it comes to access to health care.

Call your senator to tell them you don't support the GOP's efforts to overhaul the Affordable Care Act.

Please note: Upworthy has reached out to Sen. McConnell for comment. This article may be updated.

This article was updated 6/26/2017 to clarify the difference between public funding and private donations.

More
More

A woman dragged from her wheelchair for protesting the health care bill speaks out.

It's an unforgettable image.

Just a few hours after Senate Republicans released their health care bill, a woman in a wheelchair chanting "No cuts to Medicaid" is rolled down Capitol office building hallway by police.

About 10 seconds into the shot, the officers lift her out of her chair and carry her off-screen and outside as her chants grow louder and louder.

Her name is Stephanie Woodward. She's a disability rights lawyer and activist.

She had traveled to D.C. with a group of around 60 protestors to call on the Senate majority leader to preserve the program.

"People with disabilities depend on Medicaid for our lives and for our liberty," she says in an interview.

The group piled into McConnell's office with others lying down on the floor just outside. Members were taken into custody about 20 or 30 minutes later.

The Senate bill contains major cuts to Medicaid, a program that funds a large portion of medical care for Americans with disabilities.

The current proposal caps the amount of money the federal government provides the states to cover the program, which funds home care for disabled adults in addition to general medical care. With drastic funding reductions, Woodward fears, many disabled adults would be forced into nursing homes, losing their independence in the process.

"My parents were working-class people," says Woodward, who was born with spina bifida. "They couldn't afford to keep me alive if it wasn't for Medicaid. Medicaid paid for all my surgeries growing up, paid for my wheelchairs. I wouldn't be who I am today ... without Medicaid getting me here."

Woodward would like to see senators revise the bill — and bring people with disabilities into the process.

High on her list is making sure the law does not reduce the ability of people who need intensive, frequent medical care to do more than just survive.

Photo by Don Emmert/Getty Images.

"We have the right to not only live, but live just as every other American in the community," she says.

In the meantime, she has no regrets about the protest.

"I'm certainly a bit sore, but it's worth it," she insists. "It's what we need to do to fight for our lives."

For her, it's about the values in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

"We don't see that as just restricted to people without disabilities," she says. "I think that's for all Americans."

From Your Site Articles
More
Family

Taxpayer funds don't go toward abortion — which makes this move by Congress a bit weird.

Making the Hyde Amendment permanent would be a big step backward for reproductive rights.

For the past 40 years, the Hyde Amendment has prevented federal tax dollars from paying for abortions.

While not a law, the amendment has become a routine addition to federal budgets — and a thorn in the side of reproductive rights advocates. For the most part, however, members of both parties have accepted its place in American politics and haven't put up too much of a fight so long as it remains merely a rider to be renewed on an annual basis and not a permanent law.

Pro- and anti-choice activists square off outside the Supreme Court in 2005. Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images.

On Tuesday, the House of Representatives will vote on a bill that would elevate the Hyde Amendment's status from budget rider to law.

On Jan. 13th, Rep. Chris Smith (R-New Jersey) introduced the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act. It's expected the full House will convene to vote on the bill — which is likely to pass, as it did in 2013 and 2015.

Less certain, however, is what chance the bill stands in the Senate, where it has been voted down after passing the House in each of the previous two attempts. To make it through the Senate, 52 Republicans and eight Democrats would have to join forces to put the bill on the president's desk.

Rep. Chris Smith. Photo by Kris Connor/ Getty Images.

Should it pass both chambers of Congress, President Donald Trump is expected to sign the bill into law, fulfilling a campaign promise.

In September, Trump made a series of pledges aimed at courting anti-choice activists. Among those promises were plans to nominate "pro-life justices to the U.S. Supreme Court," sign the so-called Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act into law, defund Planned Parenthood "as long as they continue to perform abortions," and — yes — to make the Hyde Amendment permanent.

Early in the campaign, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders spoke out against the Hyde Amendment.

Trump signs an executive order designed to restrict aid to nongovernmental organizations that provide abortion and family planning services. Photo by Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images.

You may be asking yourself why it matters whether or not something that's been in effect for 40 years becomes permanent or not — and that's fair.

The truth is the Hyde Amendment, while a consistent part of American life in the post-Roe v. Wade world, disproportionately harms the 15.6 million low-income women who rely on Medicaid for their health care. By making the prohibition permanent, it becomes significantly more difficult to overturn (which would, again, require a majority in the House, a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate, and the signature of the president to change).

Planned Parenthood warns the Hyde Amendment may result in women foregoing necessities like electricity, heat, and food in order to save funds to pay for an abortion out-of-pocket. Additionally, it may lead to dangerous attempts to self-induce an abortion.

Making the Hyde Amendment permanent would be a step backward for reproductive rights. Call your representative and senators and urge them to vote "no" on the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act.

Family
Trending Stories