The Label Is Not the Test
Does calling someone a contractor make them one?
The idea
Whether someone is an employee or a contractor is decided by how the relationship actually works, not by what the contract calls it.
In the real world
A contractor working set hours under direction with no other clients.
Going deeper
Employment status is determined by how a relationship actually operates, not by what the contract calls it. Authorities generally examine control, integration, mutual obligation and whether the person runs a business of their own.
A contract describing self-employment while the person works fixed hours, is directed daily, uses company equipment and has no other clients invites reclassification. The consequences are back-dated and can include tax, national insurance and employment rights. The document does not protect against this, which is why the useful exercise is comparing the contract against the working reality.
Where it stops applying
Tests differ by country and continue to evolve through case law, particularly around platform work. This describes the general principle rather than any jurisdiction's specific rules.
Why it matters
Getting it wrong creates back-dated liabilities that the label does nothing to prevent.
Try this today
Compare how one contractor relationship operates against how the contract describes it.
Test yourself
A worker is contracted as self-employed but works fixed hours, is directed daily, uses company equipment and has no other clients. Why is the contract's label not decisive?
Show the answer
Authorities generally look at the substance — control, integration, mutual obligation, whether they run a business of their own. The tests vary between jurisdictions, but a document describing something the working reality contradicts does not settle the question.
Learn this in the feed Answering from memory, then again days later, is what makes it stick.