From w6yn at juno.com  Thu Jul 21 01:18:58 2005
From: w6yn at juno.com (W6YN Don Milbury)
Date: Thu Jul 21 01:32:58 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 13, Issue 3
Message-ID: <20050720.221858.2252.5.w6yn@juno.com>

That is so odd. 

RACES is not an "Outside Contractor" or a group or a chapter or anything 
like that. 

RACES is a "radio service" established with a set of restrictive rules
where licensed amateurs may operate after they have registered with and
have been activated by the local or state CD organization. Anything that
doesn't qualify under the amateur rules (Part 97) is not RACES.

73,  Don,  W6YN

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:53:42 -0400 Zach Lassiter <sapiens.unus@gmail.com>
writes:
> Here to be even considered for RACES in the appliction process you
> MUST sign a release.  RACES in our county is considered "Outside
> Contractors"
> 
From ka5cvh at gmail.com  Thu Jul 21 07:42:08 2005
From: ka5cvh at gmail.com (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
Date: Thu Jul 21 07:55:54 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 13, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <20050720.221858.2252.5.w6yn@juno.com>
References: <20050720.221858.2252.5.w6yn@juno.com>
Message-ID: <15b2c6c705072104427c841eae@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/21/05, W6YN Don Milbury <w6yn@juno.com> wrote:

> RACES is not an "Outside Contractor" or a group or a chapter or anything
> like that.

> > MUST sign a release.  RACES in our county is considered "Outside
> > Contractors"

Mike wrote

I'm sure that the county has to look at it that way in terms of
insurance whether workers comp or liability.  You know attorney's,
they have to pigeon-hole everything.  If you are not an employee of
the county you have to be a vendor or outside contractor of some sort.

YMMV

-- 
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com
From dbcolter at adelphia.net  Thu Jul 21 08:07:43 2005
From: dbcolter at adelphia.net (Dave Colter)
Date: Thu Jul 21 08:21:00 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
In-Reply-To: <20050721080048.6DC46859CBB@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <20050721120749.YWNM29002.mta9.adelphia.net@CYBERTRON>

Actually, for a state EMA to call their volunteer radio ops "outside
contractors" is pretty common. From our perspective, they are still "EMA
registered radio operators." It is a legal trick used to make certain that
they cannot be considered state employees for union or insurance purposes.
When the volunteers are considered to be "outside contractors" they cannot
be covered by Worker's Compensation Insurance, a point worth noting if you
are one of those volunteers. Apparently, no one has found a way to call us
"volunteers" without incurring some potential liability.

73,
Dave Colter WA1ZCN
SEC - NH-ARES


Original message:
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:18:58 -0700
From: W6YN Don Milbury <w6yn@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 13, Issue 3
To: ares-races@mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <20050720.221858.2252.5.w6yn@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

That is so odd. 

RACES is not an "Outside Contractor" or a group or a chapter or anything 
like that. 

RACES is a "radio service" established with a set of restrictive rules
where licensed amateurs may operate after they have registered with and
have been activated by the local or state CD organization. Anything that
doesn't qualify under the amateur rules (Part 97) is not RACES.

73,  Don,  W6YN

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:53:42 -0400 Zach Lassiter <sapiens.unus@gmail.com>
writes:
> Here to be even considered for RACES in the appliction process you
> MUST sign a release.  RACES in our county is considered "Outside
> Contractors"
> 


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
ARES-RACES mailing list
ARES-RACES@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ares-races


End of ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 1
*****************************************

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005
 


From alan.mccartney at baesystems.com  Thu Jul 21 08:30:35 2005
From: alan.mccartney at baesystems.com (McCartney, Alan (US SSA))
Date: Thu Jul 21 08:42:47 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
Message-ID: <0C193661146AB240925A7835E7247B3201BD40B7@blums0010>

Dave

The state can call us contractors all they want; however, it is a
misnomer, and it improperly used.  They need to know the true role that
RACES is and the difference between RACES and ARES and the fact that we
are volunteer, whether ARES or RACES.

By allowing the state EMA to continue to us the term "contractor", this
has legal definitions that directly prohibit all amateur radio operators
from utilizing Part 97 allocated radio frequencies to be used. 

As "contractors" we thereby would / should be required to obtain
contractor general liability insurance and naming the "employer" which
in this case being the state, as an additional named insured on the
policy.  This is implied through use of this term that we are paid, in
so much that other "trades" are contractors as well.

I don't think that we wish to establish or continue this very bad
precedence, nor should this very bad practice be tolerated or continued
to occur and the state should be duly notified and educated with respect
to proper terminology and the legal role outlined for RACES volunteers.

Thank you,

Alan McCartney
N1KAK



-----Original Message-----
From: ares-races-bounces@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:ares-races-bounces@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Dave Colter
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:08 AM
To: ares-races@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors

Actually, for a state EMA to call their volunteer radio ops "outside
contractors" is pretty common. From our perspective, they are still "EMA
registered radio operators." It is a legal trick used to make certain
that
they cannot be considered state employees for union or insurance
purposes.
When the volunteers are considered to be "outside contractors" they
cannot
be covered by Worker's Compensation Insurance, a point worth noting if
you
are one of those volunteers. Apparently, no one has found a way to call
us
"volunteers" without incurring some potential liability.

73,
Dave Colter WA1ZCN
SEC - NH-ARES


Original message:
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:18:58 -0700
From: W6YN Don Milbury <w6yn@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 13, Issue 3
To: ares-races@mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <20050720.221858.2252.5.w6yn@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

That is so odd. 

RACES is not an "Outside Contractor" or a group or a chapter or anything

like that. 

RACES is a "radio service" established with a set of restrictive rules
where licensed amateurs may operate after they have registered with and
have been activated by the local or state CD organization. Anything that
doesn't qualify under the amateur rules (Part 97) is not RACES.

73,  Don,  W6YN

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:53:42 -0400 Zach Lassiter
<sapiens.unus@gmail.com>
writes:
> Here to be even considered for RACES in the appliction process you
> MUST sign a release.  RACES in our county is considered "Outside
> Contractors"
> 


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
ARES-RACES mailing list
ARES-RACES@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ares-races


End of ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 1
*****************************************

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005
 


&quot;Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've
got...till it's gone.&quot; from Big Yellow Taxi (Joni Mitchell) but
also true about QSL.NET if more users don't open their wallets and help
financially. Please contribute TODAY !!
_______________________________________________
ARES-RACES mailing list
ARES-RACES@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ares-races
From ka5cvh at gmail.com  Thu Jul 21 20:53:40 2005
From: ka5cvh at gmail.com (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
Date: Thu Jul 21 21:07:16 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
In-Reply-To: <0C193661146AB240925A7835E7247B3201BD40B7@blums0010>
References: <0C193661146AB240925A7835E7247B3201BD40B7@blums0010>
Message-ID: <15b2c6c7050721175351143595@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/21/05, McCartney, Alan (US SSA) <alan.mccartney@baesystems.com> wrote:

> By allowing the state EMA to continue to us the term "contractor", this
> has legal definitions that directly prohibit all amateur radio operators
> from utilizing Part 97 allocated radio frequencies to be used.

Mike wrote

I'm afraid that you are oh so wrong.  We are not using our radios for
commercial purposes and as long as we don't there is no conflict with
Part 97.  Using the same logic, any amateur radio purchased by a
served agency and installed on their premises could be loosely
considered a commercial venture as well and thus "illegal".  As I
already posted, and reinforced by Dave Colter WA1ZCN this is merely a
legal maneuver to limit the served agencies exposure.  But you are
CORRECT my friend this is a legal issue but not for the reasons you
suspect.

-- 
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com
From dougy at ruraltel.net  Sun Jul 24 00:00:24 2005
From: dougy at ruraltel.net (Doug Younker)
Date: Sun Jul 24 00:14:59 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
Message-ID: <01fe01c59004$38709b60$0f01a8c0@oemcomputer>

No matter what terms served agencies used to describe ARES/RACES volunteers,
the only time Part 97's restrictions against receiving compensation are
violated is, if/when the volunteers using amateur radio receive
compensation.  But then I'm accused of over simplifying things about as much
I accused of complicating things more than they need be. :) Unless the FCC
has expressed concern over the terminology used, I see no real need to be
concerned myself.--73
Doug, N0LKK

From ka5cvh at gmail.com  Sun Jul 24 00:24:52 2005
From: ka5cvh at gmail.com (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
Date: Sun Jul 24 00:38:21 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
In-Reply-To: <15b2c6c705072321242e23f076@mail.gmail.com>
References: <01fe01c59004$38709b60$0f01a8c0@oemcomputer>
	<15b2c6c705072321242e23f076@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <15b2c6c705072321247b10bdfc@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/23/05, Doug Younker <dougy@ruraltel.net> wrote:

> I accused of complicating things more than they need be. :) Unless the FCC
> has expressed concern over the terminology used, I see no real need to be
> concerned myself.--73

Mike wrote

A rose by any other name is still a rose.  Contractor is just a
"label" as Dave I believe posted to set us apart from the actual
employees of the served agency, that's all.  And I don't think some
free pizza, bottled water and a brick or two of "AA" batteries for
your HT's "AA" pack constitutes compensation.

--
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com
From dbcolter at adelphia.net  Sun Jul 24 09:02:57 2005
From: dbcolter at adelphia.net (Dave Colter)
Date: Sun Jul 24 09:16:21 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <20050724080047.1BD02859D4D@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <20050724130242.QNBB14360.mta13.adelphia.net@CYBERTRON>

It's difficult to over-simplify this discussion from the state's point of
view. The state's rules provide for two different relationships - employee
or outside contractor. You are either one or the other, period. 

What does complicate matters somewhat is that our state has regularly paid
any ham who operated on the state's non-Amateur frequencies. That's where
you have to consider the FCC's assessment that operation of on Amateur
frequencies by paid agency staff in the course of their regular duties is
acceptable during an emergency situation. This ruling was made at the
request of some Florida EMTs as I recall. 

Does the ruling apply to EMA "contractor" radio ops who operate both state
radios and Amateur radio? It is part time, on-call work - not a regular
daily job. As one of those persons, I have always taken the approach that if
my primary assignment is to operate government command and control radios, I
can be paid, even if I also use Amateur radio on occasion. If the situation
is reversed, with Amateur ops primary and C&C secondary, I cannot.

I guess the bottom line is that the situation will be slightly different
with each agency, and hams will have to evaluate their relationship and the
law carefully.

73,
Dave Colter WA1ZCN
SEC - NH-ARES


Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 23:00:24 -0500
From: "Doug Younker" <dougy@ruraltel.net>
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
To: <ares-races@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <01fe01c59004$38709b60$0f01a8c0@oemcomputer>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="Windows-1252"

No matter what terms served agencies used to describe ARES/RACES volunteers,
the only time Part 97's restrictions against receiving compensation are
violated is, if/when the volunteers using amateur radio receive
compensation.  But then I'm accused of over simplifying things about as much
I accused of complicating things more than they need be. :) Unless the FCC
has expressed concern over the terminology used, I see no real need to be
concerned myself.--73
Doug, N0LKK


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
 


From ka5cvh at gmail.com  Sun Jul 24 10:11:20 2005
From: ka5cvh at gmail.com (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
Date: Sun Jul 24 10:24:54 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <15b2c6c70507240710669524dc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20050724080047.1BD02859D4D@mailman.qth.net>
	<20050724130242.QNBB14360.mta13.adelphia.net@CYBERTRON>
	<15b2c6c70507240710669524dc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <15b2c6c705072407112f568df2@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/24/05, Dave Colter <dbcolter@adelphia.net> wrote:

> Does the ruling apply to EMA "contractor" radio ops who operate both state
> radios and Amateur radio? It is part time, on-call work - not a regular
> daily job.

Mike wrote

That's sort of how Transtar http://www.houstontranstar.org/ in Houston
handles it too.  They have a few hams that are employees too down
there and the ham radios are always on and all the radio ops for the
various agencies including the traffic reporters "kinda" listen in on
a couple of "certain" repeaters.  If they hear something they want to
know more about they get one of the hams to swing by and get on the
air for a couple of minutes.

I office out of the house <and my car> and during a big drill a couple
of years ago I operated as a "Liaison <relay> Station" for three
different nets and was able to sit here and get caught up on paper
work that day and got paid for it too!  Now I wasn't on the air a lot
but needed to be "monitoring" two repeaters and one simplex frequency
the entire day.  This doesn't meet the standard of being financially
compensated.

--
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com
From jerryreimer at charter.net  Sun Jul 24 18:55:09 2005
From: jerryreimer at charter.net (Jerry Reimer)
Date: Sun Jul 24 18:54:17 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <15b2c6c705072407112f568df2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20050724080047.1BD02859D4D@mailman.qth.net>
	<20050724130242.QNBB14360.mta13.adelphia.net@CYBERTRON>
	<15b2c6c70507240710669524dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<15b2c6c705072407112f568df2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20050724174625.03059940@pop.charter.net>


Simply monitoring a radio does not require a license.  There is not a clear 
cut answer on employees who are Amateur Radio licensees being paid by their 
employer, and their intermittent use of Amateur Radio for the benefit of 
that employer.  Part-time or full-time does not matter; an employee is an 
employee.  A contractor is not an employee.  Even the FCC is of two minds 
on the subject of employees using their Amateur Radio for their employer.

William Cross, one of the FCC guys who writes the regulations, says such is 
prohibited under all circumstances, except the usual immediate threat to 
life and property.

Riley Hollingsworth, one of the FCC guys who enforces the regulations, said 
that is one that he will find it difficult to enforce.

The only person at risk of any enforcement action is the employee who 
actually has the Amateur Radio license.  The regulations say what is 
written.  Both houses of the FCC have spoken on this subject.  It is 
incumbent upon all of us that have a license to understand the regulations, 
inform our employer, accept the risk (or not), and act according to the 
circumstances.

Jerry Reimer, KK5CA

From sapiens.unus at gmail.com  Tue Jul 26 10:56:45 2005
From: sapiens.unus at gmail.com (Zach Lassiter)
Date: Tue Jul 26 10:56:02 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4
In-Reply-To: <20050725080037.E7306859FE8@mailman.qth.net>
References: <20050725080037.E7306859FE8@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <6d049ab3050726075630ae6bc9@mail.gmail.com>

As i stated, we are UNPAYED outside contractors.  We just have outside
contractor status to protect the county from liability and allow them
to run background checks

On 7/25/05, ares-races-request@mailman.qth.net
<ares-races-request@mailman.qth.net> wrote:
> Send ARES-RACES mailing list submissions to
> 	ares-races@mailman.qth.net
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ares-races
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	ares-races-request@mailman.qth.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	ares-races-owner@mailman.qth.net
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of ARES-RACES digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3 (Dave Colter)
>    2. RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3 (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
>    3. Re: RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3 (Jerry Reimer)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:02:57 -0400
> From: "Dave Colter" <dbcolter@adelphia.net>
> Subject: [Ares-races] RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3
> To: <ares-races@mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <20050724130242.QNBB14360.mta13.adelphia.net@CYBERTRON>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="windows-1250"
> 
> It's difficult to over-simplify this discussion from the state's point of
> view. The state's rules provide for two different relationships - employee
> or outside contractor. You are either one or the other, period. 
> 
> What does complicate matters somewhat is that our state has regularly paid
> any ham who operated on the state's non-Amateur frequencies. That's where
> you have to consider the FCC's assessment that operation of on Amateur
> frequencies by paid agency staff in the course of their regular duties is
> acceptable during an emergency situation. This ruling was made at the
> request of some Florida EMTs as I recall. 
> 
> Does the ruling apply to EMA "contractor" radio ops who operate both state
> radios and Amateur radio? It is part time, on-call work - not a regular
> daily job. As one of those persons, I have always taken the approach that
> if
> my primary assignment is to operate government command and control radios,
> I
> can be paid, even if I also use Amateur radio on occasion. If the situation
> is reversed, with Amateur ops primary and C&C secondary, I cannot.
> 
> I guess the bottom line is that the situation will be slightly different
> with each agency, and hams will have to evaluate their relationship and the
> law carefully.
> 
> 73,
> Dave Colter WA1ZCN
> SEC - NH-ARES
> 
> 
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 23:00:24 -0500
> From: "Doug Younker" <dougy@ruraltel.net>
> Subject: [Ares-races] RE: RACES - outside contractors
> To: <ares-races@mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <01fe01c59004$38709b60$0f01a8c0@oemcomputer>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="Windows-1252"
> 
> No matter what terms served agencies used to describe ARES/RACES
> volunteers,
> the only time Part 97's restrictions against receiving compensation are
> violated is, if/when the volunteers using amateur radio receive
> compensation.  But then I'm accused of over simplifying things about as
> much
> I accused of complicating things more than they need be. :) Unless the FCC
> has expressed concern over the terminology used, I see no real need to be
> concerned myself.--73
> Doug, N0LKK
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:11:20 -0500
> From: "Mike (KA5CVH) Urich" <ka5cvh@gmail.com>
> Subject: [Ares-races] RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3
> To: ARES-RACES <ares-races@mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <15b2c6c705072407112f568df2@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> On 7/24/05, Dave Colter <dbcolter@adelphia.net> wrote:
> 
> > Does the ruling apply to EMA "contractor" radio ops who operate both
> state
> > radios and Amateur radio? It is part time, on-call work - not a regular
> > daily job.
> 
> Mike wrote
> 
> That's sort of how Transtar http://www.houstontranstar.org/ in Houston
> handles it too.  They have a few hams that are employees too down
> there and the ham radios are always on and all the radio ops for the
> various agencies including the traffic reporters "kinda" listen in on
> a couple of "certain" repeaters.  If they hear something they want to
> know more about they get one of the hams to swing by and get on the
> air for a couple of minutes.
> 
> I office out of the house <and my car> and during a big drill a couple
> of years ago I operated as a "Liaison <relay> Station" for three
> different nets and was able to sit here and get caught up on paper
> work that day and got paid for it too!  Now I wasn't on the air a lot
> but needed to be "monitoring" two repeaters and one simplex frequency
> the entire day.  This doesn't meet the standard of being financially
> compensated.
> 
> --
> Mike Urich, KA5CVH
> http://ka5cvh.com
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:55:09 -0500
> From: Jerry Reimer <jerryreimer@charter.net>
> Subject: Re: [Ares-races] RE: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 3
> To: ARES-RACES <ares-races@mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20050724174625.03059940@pop.charter.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> 
> 
> Simply monitoring a radio does not require a license.  There is not a clear
> 
> cut answer on employees who are Amateur Radio licensees being paid by their
> 
> employer, and their intermittent use of Amateur Radio for the benefit of 
> that employer.  Part-time or full-time does not matter; an employee is an 
> employee.  A contractor is not an employee.  Even the FCC is of two minds 
> on the subject of employees using their Amateur Radio for their employer.
> 
> William Cross, one of the FCC guys who writes the regulations, says such is
> 
> prohibited under all circumstances, except the usual immediate threat to 
> life and property.
> 
> Riley Hollingsworth, one of the FCC guys who enforces the regulations, said
> 
> that is one that he will find it difficult to enforce.
> 
> The only person at risk of any enforcement action is the employee who 
> actually has the Amateur Radio license.  The regulations say what is 
> written.  Both houses of the FCC have spoken on this subject.  It is 
> incumbent upon all of us that have a license to understand the regulations,
> 
> inform our employer, accept the risk (or not), and act according to the 
> circumstances.
> 
> Jerry Reimer, KK5CA
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ARES-RACES mailing list
> ARES-RACES@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ares-races
> 
> 
> End of ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4
> *****************************************
>
From n4aof at arrl.net  Tue Jul 26 19:37:37 2005
From: n4aof at arrl.net (N4AOF)
Date: Tue Jul 26 19:37:05 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4
References: <20050725080037.E7306859FE8@mailman.qth.net>
	<6d049ab3050726075630ae6bc9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000e01c5923b$02727b30$2102a8c0@p4>

> As i stated, we are UNPAYED outside contractors.
> We just have outside contractor status to protect the
> county from liability and allow them to run background
> checks

There are just a couple of small problems with this:

1. It does NOT shield the county from liability to others for anything you 
do or fail to do.

2. It DOES leave you on the hook for your own legal defense if someone 
chooses to sue the county AND you for anything they think you or the county 
did or failed to do

3. It enables the County to evade the legal requirement for Workers 
Compensation coverage on you, but...

4. It probably does not mean you are not entitled to Workers Compensation 
coverage, but you would have to pay your own legal fees to take the county 
to court over their attempt to dodge responsibility (and the County will try 
to claim soverign immunity before it even bothers trying to defend its 
position in court).

The bottom line is quite simply that anyone who accepts such an arrangement 
is simply hoping that nothing ever goes wrong or is confident that they 
personally have nothing to lose including their health, their property, 
their income, and their life.



From JimLarsen2002 at alaska.net  Tue Jul 26 19:49:06 2005
From: JimLarsen2002 at alaska.net (Jim Larsen - AL7FS)
Date: Tue Jul 26 19:48:28 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4
In-Reply-To: <000e01c5923b$02727b30$2102a8c0@p4>
References: <20050725080037.E7306859FE8@mailman.qth.net>
	<6d049ab3050726075630ae6bc9@mail.gmail.com>
	<000e01c5923b$02727b30$2102a8c0@p4>
Message-ID: <42E6CBF2.2060808@alaska.net>

Good topic and general information but I will never be able to find it again 
as nobody seems to update the Subject Line.  <sigh>

73, Jim
Jim Larsen, AL7FS
From w6yn at juno.com  Tue Jul 26 22:37:59 2005
From: w6yn at juno.com (W6YN Don Milbury)
Date: Tue Jul 26 22:40:41 2005
Subject: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4 (Updated)
Message-ID: <20050726.193851.2636.11.w6yn@juno.com>

Nor did you!

73,  Don

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:49:06 -0800 Jim Larsen - AL7FS
<JimLarsen2002@alaska.net> writes:
> Good topic and general information but I will never be able to find 
> it again 
> as nobody seems to update the Subject Line.  <sigh>
> 
> 73, Jim
> Jim Larsen, AL7FS
From JimLarsen2002 at alaska.net  Tue Jul 26 22:51:10 2005
From: JimLarsen2002 at alaska.net (Jim Larsen - AL7FS)
Date: Tue Jul 26 22:50:34 2005
Subject: Subject Lines...was: Re: [Ares-races] Re: ARES-RACES Digest, Vol
	14, Issue 4 (Updated)
In-Reply-To: <20050726.193851.2636.11.w6yn@juno.com>
References: <20050726.193851.2636.11.w6yn@juno.com>
Message-ID: <42E6F69E.1060005@alaska.net>

Yes, but that was done on purpose as the email had no use in the future.

Thanks for pointing out my point I was trying to make.  I appreciate it. 
Really...I do.

I changed it this time.

73, Jim
Jim Larsen, AL7FS
Anchorage, Alaska      http://www.AL7FS.us/


W6YN Don Milbury wrote:
> Nor did you!
> 
> 73,  Don
> 
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:49:06 -0800 Jim Larsen - AL7FS
> <JimLarsen2002@alaska.net> writes:
> 
>>Good topic and general information but I will never be able to find 
>>it again 
>>as nobody seems to update the Subject Line.  <sigh>
>>
>>73, Jim
>>Jim Larsen, AL7FS
> 
