When a company uses your license, can they still make your employment status at will?

[Whale Rage Forever]

Relatively new master electrician here.

In Missouri at least, the law says that you have to be placed in a supervisory position if a company is using your license. Naturally, if a company did end up terminating you for whatever reason regardless, you could just cancel all your active permits and leave them in the dust. Considering how your permits don't just disappear the moment you're fired, it seems like a pretty big black and white area to me. This is my first time having to prepare for this sort of thing and I was hoping to find some advice so as to be prepared at the negotiating table.

So how does that typically work? When employed for the use of your license, is that typically a contractual position? How do others do this? If it is, what sorts of things are typically customary or expected?

Advice appreciated. Thank you.

 

[HEYDOG]

Relatively new master electrician here.

In Missouri at least, the law says that you have to be placed in a supervisory position if a company is using your license. Naturally, if a company did end up terminating you for whatever reason regardless, you could just cancel all your active permits and leave them in the dust. Considering how your permits don't just disappear the moment you're fired, it seems like a pretty big black and white area to me. This is my first time having to prepare for this sort of thing and I was hoping to find some advice so as to be prepared at the negotiating table.

So how does that typically work? When employed for the use of your license, is that typically a contractual position? How do others do this? If it is, what sorts of things are typically customary or expected?

Advice appreciated. Thank you.

The best thing you could do is meet with a Attorney that is familiar with business laws. It will be expensive up front…but at least you will know where you stand and may give you more negotiating power! I am not sure if you have your State Master License or in a Municipality. Some Municipalities specifically prohibit you from getting permits for any Company other than your own. Who is responsible for Workers Comp, Liability. There is a long list of things that you need to know before making any type of commitment that could put you and your License in jeopardy!

 

[jaggedben]

These things are very specific to state laws, so asking on a national forum may not get you valid answers. What you're describing wouldn't be at all typical for California bit that's also completely irrelevant.

There's a 'change of employment' form here, and some other stuff, that may shed light on your questions.

https://pr.mo.gov/electricalcontractors.asp

I would call the state agency if you have questions about what will happen if/when you notify them.

If there's money at stake besides your wages or salary then I think the advice to hire a lawyer is well taken.

 

[retirede]

Missouri is an “at will” state - basically means a company can fire anybody for any reason.

If I ran a company there and had a key employee such as you describe, I would make sure I had a written contract that covered the scenarios you mention. Without such a contract, it seems the license holder is at an advantage.

Just my opinions…..

 

[tortuga]

Missouri is an “at will” state - basically means a company can fire anybody for any reason.

If I ran a company there and had a key employee such as you describe, I would make sure I had a written contract that covered the scenarios you mention. Without such a contract, it seems the license holder is at an advantage.

Just my opinions…..

Definitely agree, on the west coast they call a master different things in CA I think its the 'C10 qualifier', a 'Supervisor' in Oregon, an 'Administrator' in WA.
If that person leaves 'at will' the entire company looses its ability to 'preform electrical installations', all permits are burnt toast, like voided checks.

 

[jaggedben]

Definitely agree, on the west coast they call a master different things in CA I think its the 'C10 qualifier', a 'Supervisor' in Oregon, an 'Administrator' in WA.
If that person leaves 'at will' the entire company looses its ability to 'preform electrical installations', all permits are burnt toast, like voided checks.

No that's not very accurate for California.

In California the C10 qualifier can be an employee, sole proprietor, partner, or officer of the corporation. The license belongs to the business, not the individual. If the qualifying individual leaves then the company has 90 days (iirc) to replace them and can also request an extension on that. Nothing happens to permits immediately and the company can continue to work on those permits during the 90 days, until the CSLB revokes the license because the qualifier wasn't replaced or for any other reason. Practically speaking, there's no automatic enforcement mechanism for cancelling permits because AHJs don't typically check your license at inspection time, as far as I'm aware. A company could probably fly under the radar for a while on existing permits after the 90 days if neither they or the qualifier notified the CSLB, or even if the license was suspended as long as no one notified the AHJ or the company didn't request revisions or a new permit. (But of course it would be illegal to actually do contracting work and one could get disciplined, fined, or prosecuted after the fact for doing so. And it behooves the qualifier to notify the CSLB right away so that they can no longer be disciplined for work done no under their supervision.)

Seems like Missouri is rather different, but I would still think there would be a grace period for a company to hire a new qualifier (or master, if that's the legal term).

 

[jaggedben]

Missouri is an “at will” state - basically means a company can fire anybody for any reason.

If I ran a company there and had a key employee such as you describe, I would make sure I had a written contract that covered the scenarios you mention. Without such a contract, it seems the license holder is at an advantage.

Just my opinions…..

What would you put in the contract to cover such a scenario? What leverage would you have?

 

[jaggedben]

To answer the question in the subject line, the answer is yes, the employer can still make your employment at will. But of course if you are what qualifies them to do licensed work, they have an incentive to keep you.

 

[letgomywago]

No that's not very accurate for California.

In California the C10 qualifier can be an employee, sole proprietor, partner, or officer of the corporation. The license belongs to the business, not the individual. If the qualifying individual leaves then the company has 90 days (iirc) to replace them and can also request an extension on that. Nothing happens to permits immediately and the company can continue to work on those permits during the 90 days, until the CSLB revokes the license because the qualifier wasn't replaced or for any other reason. Practically speaking, there's no automatic enforcement mechanism for cancelling permits because AHJs don't typically check your license at inspection time, as far as I'm aware. A company could probably fly under the radar for a while on existing permits after the 90 days if neither they or the qualifier notified the CSLB, or even if the license was suspended as long as no one notified the AHJ or the company didn't request revisions or a new permit. (But of course it would be illegal to actually do contracting work and one could get disciplined, fined, or prosecuted after the fact for doing so. And it behooves the qualifier to notify the CSLB right away so that they can no longer be disciplined for work done no under their supervision.)

Seems like Missouri is rather different, but I would still think there would be a grace period for a company to hire a new qualifier (or master, if that's the legal term).

I think there is a grace period in Washington also. I know there's one if the administrator dies.

 

[retirede]

What would you put in the contract to cover such a scenario? What leverage would you have?

My only answer to that is that I’d have the contract written by a lawyer that specializes in employment contract law.

I could see some provision for damages if the employees leaves without some defined duration of notice.

 

[jaggedben]

My only answer to that is that I’d have the contract written by a lawyer that specializes in employment contract law.

I could see some provision for damages if the employees leaves without some defined duration of notice.

And as a former employee qualifier I would never have signed such a thing, at least not without something big to compensate for it. At most, I might agree to give back a signing bonus if I left without some reasonable notice.

The clout is generally with the employee here. There isn't generally a glut of qualified licensees around these days.

 

[retirede]

And as a former employee qualifier I would never have signed such a thing, at least not without something big to compensate for it. At most, I might agree to give back a signing bonus if I left without some reasonable notice.

The clout is generally with the employee here. There isn't generally a glut of qualified licensees around these days.

Obviously, the contract must benefit both parties. There would need to be financial incentive for the key employee.

 

[Mr. Serious]

Seems like Missouri is rather different, but I would still think there would be a grace period for a company to hire a new qualifier (or master, if that's the legal term).

Maybe not. I'm in Oklahoma, but Missouri is right next door and probably has similar laws. Around here, the license holder is the individual, NOT the company. Admittedly I'm not familiar with the exact laws for this situation, but if there does exist a grace period, I think it's probably just a small de-facto grace period that may not even be written into the law. The company would have to immediately hire someone else with a master/contractor license.

 

[Another C10]

In Missouri at least, the law says that you have to be placed in a supervisory position if a company is using your license. Naturally, if a company did end up terminating you for whatever reason regardless, you could just cancel all your active permits

Personally I would never ever consider that scenario. Lets say you did leave them and simply cancelled any active permits. What happens if a lawsuit kicks in years later and they decide to sue the licensed contractor .. oh .. that's you.

Your license number or licensed credentials is the legal safeguard for any investor using your services under your name, or company name.

It doesn't matter if the inspection passed years ago .. a poor connection or poor practice that may of resulted in immense damage or worse is going to point the ones at loss in your direction.

I'd stay clear from that. If not good luck.

 

[jaggedben]

Personally I would never ever consider that scenario. Lets say you did leave them and simply cancelled any active permits. What happens if a lawsuit kicks in years later and they decide to sue the licensed contractor .. oh .. that's you.

Your license number or licensed credentials is the legal safeguard for any investor using your services under your name, or company name.

It doesn't matter if the inspection passed years ago .. a poor connection or poor practice that may of resulted in immense damage or worse is going to point the ones at loss in your direction.

I'd stay clear from that. If not good luck.

I don't follow. I think you may have this backwards.

If you leave, or are terminated, and you don't cancel your permits, then you're still responsible for work the company does that's not under your supervision. And if anything goes wrong with that, you could get sued for it. Now the burden is on you to show that you weren't responsible, even though you didn't follow the proper procedure of canceling your permits.

If a lawsuit is filed involving work that occurred while you were a bona fide employee, then you could get sued no matter what you did when you left. But unless it can be shown that you deliberately sabotaged the company, most likely the company (and its insurance company) has a duty to defend you and pay for any damages.

Yes, being a qualifying employee involves putting yourself at some legal risk on behalf of your employer. (Theoretically any job can involve that.) But it's a lot less risk than owning your own company.

 

[Another C10]

I don't follow. I think you may have this backwards.

My point was basically if I understand the original post is, If my license says I am the licensed authority ..being a contractor and I do work for someone and for what ever reason an issue comes up , I theoretically am the responsible party that could be sued.
Now if I let someone use my license number to get permits and to essentially be my partner through allowing them to operate under my business number and entity then those individuals representing my number or name have become an extension of my legal obligation in the event of a legal proceeding.

I don't think it matters that I the licensed contractor decided to simply be the material handler or supervisor of the expanded company using my legal licensed credentials.

My other point was I don't believe there is a statute of limitations on liability of a projects my name was linked to 5 years prior to the previous company that I was merely a supervisor too.

 

[jaggedben]

Some clarifications...

...
Now if I let someone use my license number to get permits and to essentially be my partner through allowing them to operate under my business number and entity then those individuals representing my number or name have become an extension of my legal obligation in the event of a legal proceeding.

In California this would be illegal unless you actually created a legal partnership, LLC, or corporation together with the people who were 'using your license'. And actually, that entity would get its own license and you would be the qualifying individual.

However in Missouri it evidently works differently, and in my last above I was assuming you were referring to the OPs situation.

I don't think it matters that I the licensed contractor decided to simply be the material handler or supervisor of the expanded company using my legal licensed credentials.

Probably correct everywhere. I don't think any jurisdiction that bestows licenses wants licensees to in effect resell their qualification to others who aren't licensed. But states vary as to exactly how they enforce that.

My other point was I don't believe there is a statute of limitations on liability of a projects my name was linked to 5 years prior to the previous company that I was merely a supervisor too.

No, but if you were an employee of that company, as opposed to any kind of owner, then the company probably has a duty to defend you in perpetuity. (i.e. pay for the lawyers and any damages awarded). Plus as soon as you are no longer an employee then you are no longer responsible for what that company does afterward.