Don't limit jobs for independent contractors
As a current independent contractor, I found Rich Seckel's scenario — a person who thought they were an employee but upon being terminated were surprised to find out they were independent contractors — misleading ("Many Ky. workers classified as contractors, denied benefits," Aug. 22).
If workers checked their paychecks they would have seen that no taxes, Social Security, etc., were deducted. The IRS has very stringent rules regarding the issue of independent contractors being treated as just that — independent. That's the benefit: We are not treated as employees; the same policies and demands an employer makes on an employee cannot and do not apply to an independent contractor.
Being an independent contractor is basically a cash-only job, it provides great flexibility in scheduling and within the job itself. When states become stringent and make offering contractor positions unprofitable for employers, those jobs disappear.
There are several states where some companies will not do business because they are unable to offer these positions, California being one example. I love being an independent contractor; the flexibility, the income it provides and the freedom in my work environment are all very positive and important. It is the responsibility of every individual to know the facts regarding their employment.
There are already more than adequate laws in place, and for those of us who work daily in this situation we are aware of our freedom, responsibility and, most of all, how fortunate we are to have this opportunity in the workplace.
Too much focus on Brits
I was so upset when I got my Herald-Leader out of the box on Aug. 13 and on the front page a big picture of the Olympics closing ceremony showed a British swimmer and another girl holding a British flag.
The United States won more medals than any other country. The paper could have covered half the front page with a list of all the medal winners and a big picture of American winners, such as Michael Phelps, the most decorated Olympian of all time.
I guess the Herald-Leader is owned by the British since it ran this picture on the front page.
Blue blood drives
Every time there is a competitive blood drive between the University of Kentucky and another university, the blood center handicaps UK by not allowing fans out in the state to contribute without driving to Lexington.
This is absurd for at least two reasons. First, if the need for blood is even close to urgent, they should make it easier to give, not harder. Second, by not taking blood at locations in Jefferson County you are losing out on arguably the largest contingent of UK fans at any single location in the state.
Should we enter all competitive arenas with one hand tied behind our back?
I have contacted the blood center in the past when there was a donor drive between UK and the University Tennessee. I was told the areas of Lexington and Louisville were controlled by different organizations (Red Cross in Louisville) and they weren't supposed "to cross the line."
Who makes these rules and why can't they be suspended for one week a year?
It would seem to be fair for all blood centers to accept donations pegged to either school no matter where they were drawn. Maybe the University of Louisville doesn't have the support out in the state they keep blabbing about after all. Could that really be the reason? I sure hope not for all the people who need blood.
Not true to form
I received a form letter from Mitch McConnell that thanked me for sharing my thoughts with him and it said, "it helps me represent Kentucky in the United States Senate."
That was wrong because when I contacted him I only asked one question: Are you going to resign if President Barack Obama is re-elected? Nothing I said in the letter could have been misinterpreted as input on any issue he might have to deal with other than his future employment.
He said, "I want to earn your trust every day." He can earn my trust, all he has to do is his job, which I believe is to work with other elected officials and make legislation that positively affects Kentucky and America. When was the last time he attached his name to a bill that made sense for America?
He said, "I look forward to working with a new administration and Congress to move Kentucky and our nation forward." Why hasn't he worked with this administration to make legislation that "moves" Kentucky and our nation forward?
He said, "The challenges we face are too important for anything less than our best efforts as we debate the ideas and legislation needed to improve the lives of all Americans." I agree we need our best effort. When is he going to start?
He said, "please continue to keep me informed of issues that are important to you." The issue that is important to me is that he does his stinking job.