Transaction costs for one. It sounds like an incredible mess to actually implement. And why shift that burden to the customer? In a haircut scenario, the person getting the cut is unquestionably a customer and not an employer. So why make him/her shoulder the administrative and legal burden?
Think beyond wage and hour. Customer #2 gets cut by scissors, suffering serious bodily injury. Who does she sue? The barber, sure. But these actions were performed during the course and scope of employment. So now (per 400+ years of common law) the employer — aka previous customer - is now on the hook for those damages.
I’d certainly never get my hair cut there. It might cost me $100,000.
Ok so change that law, but now you’re ditching a few centuries of agency law and getting exactly what in return? A system no more efficient than what it’s replacing.
>And why shift that burden to the customer? In a haircut scenario, the person getting the cut is unquestionably a customer and not an employer
That's exactly the reasoning I said doesn't work. You can't just say that a situation is "absurd". Why is it absurd? What's the standard so you can derive the boundaries?
>Customer #2 gets cut by scissors, suffering serious bodily injury. Who does she sue? The barber, sure. But these actions were performed during the course and scope of employment. So now (per 400+ years of common law) the employer — aka previous customer - is now on the hook for those damages.
No, Customer #2 would be a second employer.
>Ok so change that law, but now you’re ditching a few centuries of agency law and getting exactly what in return? A system no more efficient than what it’s replacing.
I don't know what that's responding to. I wasn't ditching anything. I was asking for what grounds the distinction.
Think beyond wage and hour. Customer #2 gets cut by scissors, suffering serious bodily injury. Who does she sue? The barber, sure. But these actions were performed during the course and scope of employment. So now (per 400+ years of common law) the employer — aka previous customer - is now on the hook for those damages.
I’d certainly never get my hair cut there. It might cost me $100,000.
Ok so change that law, but now you’re ditching a few centuries of agency law and getting exactly what in return? A system no more efficient than what it’s replacing.