SELF- EMPLOYMENT AND THE NEW WAYS OF WORKING.

[Justbillywitt]

As long as you work in an organisation were you don't have the final say, you don't owe and control your time from certain period of the day and you don't decide when you go to work and when not to work, and have a closing time set up by another individual and you are being paid salary by the person who set up the company or business, you are not self employed. You being skillful and professional in your field doesn't matter, as long you are not the person who own the company earn from you are not self employed.

[Apocollapse]

Well, being self employed require you to understand with your clients, you might have to working together with other people and you need to have negotiation skill with others. Like it or not, it's not quite similar for being an employee or boss.

Even though you can make decision and do whatever you want as a boss, I doubt if the customers will seek you if you have reject their request. It's because the customers have been disappointed and they see that as wasting time to contact you.

[Pi-network314159]

Op I don't see how an employee is a CEO of the job he render to an organization he is working for. There is only but one CEO, and that is the owner of the company you are Hired to work. Yours is to deliver the job giving to you and you been paid for the Job and nothing more. You can only be classified as a CEO when you have built your own brand and you now hire people to work for you. You can't be under somebody and be claiming CEO. You are subjected to only one CEO who is the head of the company and that is final.

[Lamtel]

I disagree with you that an employee is a CEO in the company that he is working. If you're employed to work with a company or someone in order for you to be paid, you are not self employed because you depend on working for someone to get paid. They can choose to pay you or fire you. When you're self employed, you are your own boss. You make your decisions and don't report to anyone or depend on anyone to give the final say.

I support your opinion on this matter. One can not be self employed when is totally under the supervision and commands of another person. Being self employed means you have to be the entrepreneur of the business, service or what ever thing your doing. Your the only person bearing the risk and enjoy the benefits, but in a situation where by your being employed or hired by a proprietor or film you no long bear the risk and benefits alone, your automatically not the entrepreneur so can not be seen as a self employed.

[viljy]

Well, the OP describes it from the perspective of a person who cannot be replaced by someone else. Whereas in most cases, a self-employed person is not a boss at all, but the same "hired employee", but only his clients are his boss. If we talk about the service sector, then it is completely a "customer's market". The client chooses which of the "boss" to hire, and not the other way around. On the contrary, it happens only when a self-employed person is a famous writer (for example, such as Eduard Limonov) or a very successful lawyer, etc. In other 99% of cases, the "boss" will "beg" the client to hire him.

[lornadane]

Self-employment sounds attractive, but it’s not for everyone tbh. No fixed income, no benefits, and no safety net unless you build one yourself. A lot of newbies underestimate this part. It’s legit, but people should DYOR and plan properly before quitting a stable job.