Rhonda was employed by Midwest Bank of North Carolina torepresent it. Midwest discussed the possibility of Rhonda workingas in-house counsel for Midwest to handle recovery and bankruptcy cases. On her employment application, Rhonda disclosed that she had been convicted of 2 misdemeanor larceny. Those convictions made it unlawful for her to become an employee of Midwest without FDI Capproval. Midwest proceeded with its working relationship with Rhonda, who closed her private practice and moved on site with Midwest.The parties executed a written contract under which Rhonda would provide legal services as an independent contractor.
Both parties intended that Rhonda would not be considered an employee unless the FDIC waiver was obtained. Such a waiver was never sought for Rhonda. Rhonda was considered an independent contractor for tax purposes and was never paid a salary by Midwest but, instead, was paid for the bills she submitted. She received no benefits or compensation for business travel. She used letterhead that designated her simply as an attorney-at-law and did not receive business cards. However, she was provided with on-site officespace, support, staff, equipment, and the use of company vehicles. She was paid for continuing education. Midwest exercised control over the hours in which she had access to her office.
After complaining about a sexually and racially hostile workenvironment. Rhonda was terminated. She filed several claims under Title VII. Was Midwest Rhonda's employer? Why or Why not?
Rhonda was employed by Midwest Bank of North Carolina torepresent it. Midwest discussed the possibility of Rhonda workingas in-house counsel for Midwest to handle recovery and bankruptcy cases. On her employment application, Rhonda disclosed that she had been convicted of 2 misdemeanor larceny. Those convictions made it unlawful for her to become an employee of Midwest without FDI Capproval. Midwest proceeded with its working relationship with Rhonda, who closed her private practice and moved on site with Midwest.The parties executed a written contract under which Rhonda would provide legal services as an independent contractor.
Both parties intended that Rhonda would not be considered an employee unless the FDIC waiver was obtained. Such a waiver was never sought for Rhonda. Rhonda was considered an independent contractor for tax purposes and was never paid a salary by Midwest but, instead, was paid for the bills she submitted. She received no benefits or compensation for business travel. She used letterhead that designated her simply as an attorney-at-law and did not receive business cards. However, she was provided with on-site officespace, support, staff, equipment, and the use of company vehicles. She was paid for continuing education. Midwest exercised control over the hours in which she had access to her office.
After complaining about a sexually and racially hostile workenvironment. Rhonda was terminated. She filed several claims under Title VII. Was Midwest Rhonda's employer? Why or Why not?
