CABL Forum - Re: Suit Against Rogers Cable

Read the story about the Canadian salesman. Sounds to me like the MSO stipulated in the contract that they only pay commission on sales that are actually installed. If the contractor agreed to this then I think the salesman is SOL. Installers get paid for working installs, Splicers for working line, and salesmen for actual new customers. If this guy was writing BS sales (as we have all seen) then TS. If he wrote $1800. worth of business and only $100. was ever installed that's all he gets! I don't usually come down on the side of contractors but in this case it looks like was writing bad contracts. It's not like doing a job and the contractor skips.

> Chris,
> That certainly is an interesting question. It seems to me that Time Warner had to settle a similar case here in the U.S.A. sometime back in the early nineties. If I remember correctly it also involved a subcontract direct sales agent who applied for, and eventually won the right to collect, unemployment insurance benefits on Time Warner’s ticket even though he nominally reported to an intermediary contractor. Since he received work orders and billing system green sheets directly from the MSO staff, and reported to their office in doing so, his contention was that he had been a defacto employee of Time Warner. Not surprisingly, I cannot find any record of this on-line but I did find these little gems:
>
> http://csmweb2.emcweb.com/durable/2000/02/28/p11s1.htm >
> http://www.ebglaw.com/article_171.html >
>
> > Check out the story about the direct-sales subcontractor at the attached link. There are a whole lot of interesting issues raised in it. The main one is whether the sub of a sub may be considered an employee of the MSO. http://www.cedmagazine.com/cedailydirect/0302/cedaily030203.htm#6

INSTALLATION

CONSTRUCTION / TECH

OFFICE / OTHER

Re: Suit Against Rogers Cable