Comments on: 5 legal pitfalls of telecommuting http://www.hrtechnews.com/5-legal-pitfalls-of-telecommuting/ HRMS, Internet Monitoring, Payroll Software, Time and Attendance, and more Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:58:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Owen http://www.hrtechnews.com/5-legal-pitfalls-of-telecommuting/comment-page-1/#comment-409 Owen Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:15:37 +0000 http://www.hrtechnews.com/?p=300#comment-409 Consider, that positions in which work can be efficiently completed from home, can qualify as reasonable accommodation opportunities for people with disabilities to return to work as valuable employees. Then, think about whether ADA trumps Fair Labor Standards etc. Also think about engaging people with disabilities as independent contractors working from their homes with an independent central support system like the one we provide at THE-Group to disabled professionals, senior managers and executives who associate with us so they can work from home. By employing the talent and the experience of disabled professionals, senior managers and executives who are silently eliminated from re-employment consideration [89% national unemployment rate vs 60% for other disabled people] employers can have the best of both worlds, employing the talents of top talent while maintaining the status quo. Its worth considering as a low risk solution to acquiring talent. Owen P. Doonan III, Chairman of the Board THE-Group [The Handi-CAPABLE Executive Group] Virtual management, IT & mentor consultants to Entrepreneurs, Professionals and Executives with disabilities. Advocates for virtual access to public meetings and home based employment for the homebound and people with severe limiting disabilities. Statutory Member, Massachusetts State Rehabilitation Council. Chairman, Massachusetts State Rehabilitation Council's Consumer Satisfaction Committee Chairman, Massachusetts Statewide Task force on Home Based and Self Employment for people with disabilities Member, AT [Assistive Technology] Act Advisory Council Founding member Massachusetts Statewide Task force on Acquired Brain Injury [ABI] & Traumatic Brain Injury [TBI]. Member Easter Seals - MRC Assistive Technology Loan Review Committee P.O.BOX 2169 DUXBURY, MA 02331 E-mail: mentor-one@usa.net Consider, that positions in which work can be efficiently completed from home, can qualify as reasonable accommodation opportunities for people with disabilities to return to work as valuable employees. Then, think about whether ADA trumps Fair Labor Standards etc. Also think about engaging people with disabilities as independent contractors working from their homes with an independent central support system like the one we provide at THE-Group to disabled professionals, senior managers and executives who associate with us so they can work from home. By employing the talent and the experience of disabled professionals, senior managers and executives who are silently eliminated from re-employment consideration [89% national unemployment rate vs 60% for other disabled people] employers can have the best of both worlds, employing the talents of top talent while maintaining the status quo.

Its worth considering as a low risk solution to acquiring talent.

Owen P. Doonan III, Chairman of the Board
THE-Group [The Handi-CAPABLE Executive Group]

Virtual management, IT & mentor consultants to Entrepreneurs, Professionals and Executives with disabilities. Advocates for virtual access to public meetings and home based employment for the homebound and people with severe limiting disabilities.

Statutory Member, Massachusetts State Rehabilitation Council.
Chairman, Massachusetts State Rehabilitation Council’s Consumer Satisfaction Committee
Chairman, Massachusetts Statewide Task force on Home Based and Self Employment for people with disabilities
Member, AT [Assistive Technology] Act Advisory Council
Founding member Massachusetts Statewide Task force on Acquired Brain Injury [ABI] & Traumatic Brain Injury [TBI].
Member Easter Seals – MRC Assistive Technology Loan Review Committee

P.O.BOX 2169
DUXBURY, MA 02331
E-mail: mentor-one@usa.net

]]> By: Nicole Belson Goluboff, Esq. http://www.hrtechnews.com/5-legal-pitfalls-of-telecommuting/comment-page-1/#comment-390 Nicole Belson Goluboff, Esq. Sat, 19 Jul 2008 10:45:56 +0000 http://www.hrtechnews.com/?p=300#comment-390 Another legal consequence of which both telecommuters and employers must be aware is the potential for a tax penalty imposed on the telecommuter if he and the employer are located in different states. If, for example, a Connecticut resident is employed by a New York company and the company allows him to telecommute a few days a week, New York will tax him, not only on the wages he earns on his office-bound days, but also on the wages he earns on his Connecticut days. Because Connecticut will also tax the income he earns in Connecticut, the telecommuter will be double taxed on that income. In some cases, the home state may grant a credit for taxes the telecommuter pays New York on his home state income. But if New York has a higher tax rate than the home state, the telecommuter will still be penalized, forced to pay the New York rate on the home state income. The cost of the telecommuter tax can exceed the potential savings on gasoline a part-time telework arrangement is designed to provide. Companies considering allowing interstate telework must determine for which states they have to withhold. They must also be aware that they may not be able to take full advantage of the recruitment, retention, productivity and cost saving benefits of telework, because the telework penalty can discourage out-of-state applicants and employees from accepting an offer to telecommute. Proposed federal legislation called the Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act would eliminate the problem, prohibiting states from taxing the income nonresidents earn on the days they work at home. The bill is a bi-partisan measure currently pending in both the House and Senate. Both employers and employees seeking to expand the use of telework in their organizations should let their Congressional delegates know that this legislation is a necessary part of the solution to the gas price crisis we face. Another legal consequence of which both telecommuters and employers must be aware is the potential for a tax penalty imposed on the telecommuter if he and the employer are located in different states. If, for example, a Connecticut resident is employed by a New York company and the company allows him to telecommute a few days a week, New York will tax him, not only on the wages he earns on his office-bound days, but also on the wages he earns on his Connecticut days. Because Connecticut will also tax the income he earns in Connecticut, the telecommuter will be double taxed on that income.

In some cases, the home state may grant a credit for taxes the telecommuter pays New York on his home state income. But if New York has a higher tax rate than the home state, the telecommuter will still be penalized, forced to pay the New York rate on the home state income.

The cost of the telecommuter tax can exceed the potential savings on gasoline a part-time telework arrangement is designed to provide.

Companies considering allowing interstate telework must determine for which states they have to withhold. They must also be aware that they may not be able to take full advantage of the recruitment, retention, productivity and cost saving benefits of telework, because the telework penalty can discourage out-of-state applicants and employees from accepting an offer to telecommute.

Proposed federal legislation called the Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act would eliminate the problem, prohibiting states from taxing the income nonresidents earn on the days they work at home. The bill is a bi-partisan measure currently pending in both the House and Senate. Both employers and employees seeking to expand the use of telework in their organizations should let their Congressional delegates know that this legislation is a necessary part of the solution to the gas price crisis we face.

]]>