Classification of workers as either employees or independent contractors is one of the controversial issues that are facing many organizations, especially in the USA. A significant number of workers have been misclassified as independent contractors by their employers to avoid paying wages, as well as overtime. Companies have intentionally violated employment discrimination laws for their benefits. Besides, maintaining a rigid company dress policy is associated with many ethical issues that organizations should consider ( Kwak, 2012) . Therefore, the owner of Dream Massage should consider several factors before defining his employees as independent contractors, and he should adhere to discriminatory law and ethical standards.
Employee Vs. Independent Contractor
Based on Dream Massage scenario, Janice falls under the category of millions of Americans who have been misclassified as independent contractors, even though they rightly qualified as employees. It is not surprising that Dream Massage has classified Janice as an independent worker, as a survey that was done by the US Department of Labor (DOL) found that about 30% of business employees are misclassified as independent workers ( Kwak, 2012) . The misclassification is increasingly becoming common in businesses that are determined to reduce the cost of operations while increasing their profits ( Kwak, 2012) . For Janice to qualify as an independent contractor as alleged by Dream Massage the business can only control the quality or result of the job but not how it should be done. Dream Massage has no authority of the mandate to determine and control how Janice is doing her work so long as she achieves the set objectives or outcome. On the contrary, for Janice to be classified as an independent contractor, she has full control of how the massage therapy services are provided. Thus, by controlling how Janice does her work, she qualifies as an employee and not an independent contractor.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Besides, an independent contractor determines their work schedule or when they are supposed to work ( Kwak, 2012) . By defining Janice as an independent contractor, she acts as an independent business entity and Dream Massage cannot determine her working hours. Her main responsibility should be to fulfill the work agreement. Hence, by setting a work schedule for Janice, she qualifies as an employee. Janice is also expected to use her massage products if she is classified as an independent contractor. Moreover, the dress policy implemented by Dream Massage does not apply to Janice if she is indeed an independent contractor. Therefore, Janice is an employee and not an independent contractor.
Violation of Employment Discrimination Laws
Dream massage has violated several discrimination employment laws by insisting that Janice cannot wear her hijab in the workplace because it violates the company's dress code policy. According to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically Title VII, it is illegal to discriminate employees because of their religious practices ( King, Avery & Sackett, 2013) . At the same time, according to King, Avery, and Sackett (2013), The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) maintains that is illegal to fail to hire an employee because either customer or colleagues are not comfortable with the hijab. Apart from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) states that no woman should be restricted from wearing hijab.
Therefore, Dream Massage violated employment discrimination laws by insisting that Janice must not wear hijab in the workplace. Laws allow people to freely exercise their religious practices in any setting, including the workplace ( King, Avery & Sackett, 2013) . However, Dream Massage has the burden of proving that wearing hijab leads to undue hardship that can result in a massive interference of its operations or profitability. Besides, based on Dream Massage's classification, Janice is an independent contractor, and dress code policy does not apply in her case.
Ethical Considerations Associated with Rigid Company Dress Policy
The implementation of dress code policies in the workplace is increasingly becoming popular in the workplace. Companies are using dress codes to communicate to employees about what they consider to be appropriate work attire. Besides, the dress code policy is used to convey the desired image to customers and other stakeholders ( Levi, 2007) . As a result, it is appropriate for Dream Massage to design and implement a dress code policy for its employees. However, the company must consider several ethical issues that are linked to a rigid company dress policy. The first ethical issue that the company should consider is whether the dress code policy leads to the invasion of an employee’s personal space. Specifically, Dream Massage should consider the limit to which it can implement the dress code policy. Secondly, the dress code policy should be fair to all employees in the workplace ( Levi, 2007) . For instance, religious practices should not be used to set unfair dress code policy. Therefore, fairness should prevail in the dress code policy.
Conclusion
The owner of Dream Massage should reconsider the decision to classify Janice as an independent contractor. The scenario proves that Janice is an employee. Employment discrimination laws allow Janice to wear hijab whether she is an employee or an independent contractor. The formulation of the dress code policy should be based on ethical standards and requirements.
References
King, E. B., Avery, D. R., & Sackett, P. (2013). Three Perspectives of Employment Discrimination 50 Years After the Civil Rights Act—A Promise Fulfilled? Journal of Business and Psychology , 28 (4), 375-382.
Kwak, J. P. (2012). Employees Versus Independent Contractors: Why States Should Not Enact Statutes That Target the Construction Industry. Journal of Legislation , 39(2) , 295-316.
Levi, J. L. (2007). Misapplying equality theories: Dress codes at work. Yale Journal of Law & Feminism , 19 , 353-390.
