No, it's not _all_ about the nature of the work. Again, that's just applying one-dimensional criteria. To re-emphasize: is the employee/contractor classification just one factor or a combination of factors?
The concept of "driving" does not automatically mean an "employee" relationship. Many (probably most) 18-wheel truck drivers are independent contractors. Many drivers of tour & charter buses are subcontractors as well. Those charter bus drivers transport people like Uber drivers too.
Likewise, the "nature of photography work" does not instantly categorize it as employee vs freelancer. Sports Illustrated had some staff/employee photographers. But National Geographic has freelance photographers.
Another most obvious example to HN would be the existence of both contract and employee programmers.
It isn't just about the "nature of work".
It isn't just about who provides the equipment.
It isn't just about who decides the hours of when the work is performed.
No, it's not _all_ about the nature of the work. Again, that's just applying one-dimensional criteria. To re-emphasize: is the employee/contractor classification just one factor or a combination of factors?
The concept of "driving" does not automatically mean an "employee" relationship. Many (probably most) 18-wheel truck drivers are independent contractors. Many drivers of tour & charter buses are subcontractors as well. Those charter bus drivers transport people like Uber drivers too.
Likewise, the "nature of photography work" does not instantly categorize it as employee vs freelancer. Sports Illustrated had some staff/employee photographers. But National Geographic has freelance photographers.
Another most obvious example to HN would be the existence of both contract and employee programmers.
It isn't just about the "nature of work".
It isn't just about who provides the equipment.
It isn't just about who decides the hours of when the work is performed.
It's isn't just _one_ criteria.