What problem does it solve?
It helps you determine whether a proposed engagement should be treated as an employment relationship, a service/contract relationship, or another structure—before work starts—so you can avoid costly misclassification and compliance exposure.
Core Features & Use Cases
- Labor relationship identification (forward-looking): Applies the “three-factor” framework from relevant guidance to distinguish labor relationships, labor service relationships, and contracting-like arrangements.
- Fact-to-structure gap analysis: Compares the organization’s intended “pre-set structure” with what the facts actually indicate, highlighting the specific mismatches and risk drivers.
- Lawyer-friendly output with guardrails: Uses a staged workflow with a strict “not yet started” gate, scoped assumptions, and upgrade triggers when the situation is high-risk.
Real-world use cases: deciding whether to hire an analyst who is “embedded but flexible,” evaluating a recruitment consultant paid per referral, or checking a proposed contractor arrangement before signing.
Quick Start
Describe the proposed working arrangement for the person (work content, management/control, payment model, equipment/tools, place of work, and duration) and I will ask only the missing questions needed to run the labor relationship classification.
