To answer a question on the IC thread below, someone - sm

asked, "I am trying to get a grasp on the IC vs employee thing but I don't understand why a company would want to hire an IC then?"

No one has answered this as of yet.  

Why would a company hire an IC then?  Because they don't have to take out taxes, (including their share of Social Security), and they do not have to provide benefits.   All they have to do is cut the IC a check, and then the IC is responsible for all the taxes, including all of the Social Security taxes, as well as providing for his/her own health insurance if they can afford it, retirement, and any other expenses associated with running the IC's business. 

Now, look around at the few large companies left that offer employee status.  I believe you will see fewer and fewer companies who will offer employee status in the not too distant future because government control will be a headache no one will want or be able to afford.  More and more jobs will be offshored, particularly by the large MTSOs. 

What do we do about it if we are an IC?  For every job posting that requests the IC work a set shift, we respond to the ad stating IRS guidelines and that they are in violation of those guidelines.  Plain and simple.  If they require a set schedule, they should be hiring employees.  Until we do so, they will continue to milk the cow for all she's worth. 

Do not sign a contract until you have a good grasp of what it requires.  If the contract requires you to work a set schedule and removes the flexibility from you to act as an independent contractor, report the violator to the IRS.  Plain and simple. 

If enough ICs would band together, these MTSOs would get the message that they can no longer operate under the radar.