Legal Question in Construction Law in California

Virtually anyone can be an employee of someone else (well...assuming they're of a certain age, a US citizen or have the right immigration status). But the owner/builder has to do it right. An employer has a number of legal obligations including the payment of payroll taxes, social security and must have worker's compensation for every employee.

I agree with Mr. Redenbacher, but I cannot imagine why either party would want to do that. The owner would subject themselves to all kinds of additional trouble, expense and liabilities. He would lose many rights regarding any problems or defects in the construction. The taxes on the labor portion of the work would be MUCH higher, as would the workers compensation insurance expense and unemployment contributions. The contractor would lose the right to complete the job, because he would be an at-will employee. I am not sure, but it is quite possible he would not have mechanics lien rights as a direct employee of the owner. The owner would become liable for wage and hour law compliance. It would just be a mess for everyone. And equally importantly, I cannot imagine any benefit to that arrangement that could not better be met through some variation on contracting, such as cost+ or "time and materials" contracting.