WSJ on Wine Advocate and the travel/ethics issue

[David M. Bueker]

Linda,

Upset about not getting 90 point scores from Jay?

David,
Not sure what is your problem now, but rest assured I could care less about how my wines are rated by WA. As a matter of fact, since 1996 I have only submitted 2 (two) wines to them, as I don't seem to make the style they are geared to. We make Pinot Noir in a delicate style, and it seems that they prefer the "bigger" styles.
So, can we get back to our regular programming ?
Linda

Linda,

Upset about not getting 90 point scores from Jay?

David, this is unworthy of you!

Linda,

Upset about not getting 90 point scores from Jay?

David, this is unworthy of you!

No, it's fairly typical.

[Jenise]

but this just doesn't look correct. It is my understanding that as an Independent Contractor, an Entity they are contracted with can only tell them WHAT the task at hand is, not HOW to accomplish it. Thoughts ?

Not correct. It simply means you (the IC) pay your own taxes and provide your own bennies. In my ex-profession independent contractors are used all the time, and they perform work as directed or set forth in protocols. Sometimes they're even seconded to staff and act in all ways like permanent employees. They're just not guaranteed employment, and as their quasi-employer when it comes time to part ways you simply terminate their contract.

[David M. Bueker]

Linda,

My apology. My post, a poor attempt at humor, was totally innappropriate. I'm sorry.

[Jenise]

Linda,

My apology. My post, a poor attempt at humor, was totally innappropriate. I'm sorry.

This is why God invented emoticons.

Linda,

My apology. My post, a poor attempt at humor, was totally innappropriate. I'm sorry.

This is why God invented emoticons.

... and even then mistakes/misunderstandings are easily made.

Big thumbs up for the apology David - we'll all make mistakes, but this sort of response is a fantastic way to resolve it. You have my respect.

regards

Ian

Linda,

My apology. My post, a poor attempt at humor, was totally innappropriate. I'm sorry.

This is why God invented emoticons.

... and even then mistakes/misunderstandings are easily made.

Big thumbs up for the apology David - we'll all make mistakes, but this sort of response is a fantastic way to resolve it. You have my respect.

regards

Ian

I agree Ian, David's stature just grew in my eyes, and as you say we all make mistakes. Mistakes are easily made, and sometimes difficult to correct. It takes a good person to admit to the mistake and apologize for it. David has my respect also .

but this just doesn't look correct. It is my understanding that as an Independent Contractor, an Entity they are contracted with can only tell them WHAT the task at hand is, not HOW to accomplish it. Thoughts ?

Not correct. It simply means you (the IC) pay your own taxes and provide your own bennies. In my ex-profession independent contractors are used all the time, and they perform work as directed or set forth in protocols. Sometimes they're even seconded to staff and act in all ways like permanent employees. They're just not guaranteed employment, and as their quasi-employer when it comes time to part ways you simply terminate their contract.

Uh, I don't think that is 100% accurate either Jenise. But I guess folks could be using the term "independent contractor" in different ways. The term has an implication in the world of taxation. Robert Reynolds would be more knowledgeable than I coz he does a lot more tax work but the IRS has guidelines and/or requirements to determine if a person is an "independent contractor" relative to a company.

Simply paying your own taxes does not make you an IC from a taxation viewpoint. The reason the IRS is interested is tax revenue: in most situations an employee has 7.65% or so of gross pay withheld and submitted to the Feds for social security; their employer matches that amount, bringing the total to over 15%. An IC pays about halfway in between, somewhere around 11-12%. Whatever it is, the total tax remitted is less for an IC than an employee.

As a result, the IRS expects that an IC is truly independent. One test is control over hours. If a company dictates the time of the start and stop of the workday to a person, that person is an employee, not an IC. Other tests exist. The type of situation where the IC works whatever hours they feel is needed can lead an outsider to the viewpoint/deduction that an IC is given a task to perform without instructions as to how to perform it.