Commercial landlords have the right to set facility operational hours, and require their tenants to conduct business within those time frames. For instance, shopping malls do the same. While I know it isn’t common practice any longer, some malls actually went further by requiring their tenant businesses to be open and operational on the days they specified. If a salon landlord were to dictate your operational days/hours by requiring you to be operational certain days/times, that would be an overstep, but it’s extremely typical (and legal) for the salon landlord to set facility operational hours and prohibit tenants from working outside of them. There are several reasons why salon landlords may do this, but typically, it has to do with liability and/or the landlord’s own lease restrictions. The owners/property managers of the facility your landlord leases may not allow businesses to be open past a certain time, but the salon landlord may also not be comfortable knowing people are in the building after dark, with nobody else there.

I rent my apartment 7 days a week whether I’m there or not. My landlord doesn’t “close” my apartment for thre weekend .

I’ve been studying to become an EA for the last year. I just passed the first exam in August and plan to take part 2 in the spring. The weirdest thing for me is that the IRS is really clear on what separates an independent contractor from a separate business entity, the state of California mixes the two definitions and uses them interchangeably. In the absence of a work agreement, a self-employed business owner is just that–but not according to the state of California, where an “independent contractor” is no different from any other self-employed business owner. It’s obnoxious and unnecessarily confuses the issue, which likely led to the problems they’re having in the first place, lol.

Unfortunately, there’s no grace period. The law is being applied retroactively, as this wasn’t new legislation but a clarification of existing legislation. Basically, it’s California’s stance that employers should have already been in compliance. Since so many people were not, they revised and simplified the law to prevent violations in the future. That doesn’t benefit anyone who was already in violation.

I’m not sure I understand what you’re asking, but if you’re wondering whether you have to pay your rental salon from your stylist business–that’s a personal choice. I would, but I prefer to keep my businesses separate entities.

If you were in any other state, I’d say yes. However, California is an exception. I’d recommend speaking with an employment law attorney before implementing any incentive program like this for renters, as you’re essentially creating a system that resembles a quota. Personally, I think it’s clear that it isn’t (since there is no “or else”), but the state may see it differently. They really want to create a clear and distinct separation between the renters and the landlords they rent from, which is understandable given the amount of abuse present in rental salons.