Accidents on a Business Premises Accidents that occur in business premises as a result of the management’s carelessness make the business liable for the injury caused. A business is required to compensate any person who suffers injury in the business premises if the management did not take reasonable care to ensure safety. The law only requires the management to take reasonable measures to ensure safety. Therefore, the business cannot be held responsible for the accidents if the management takes reasonable care to guarantee safety. An example case of negligence involved the employees of a company called Costco. The workers failed to wipe up liquid soap that had spilled on the floor. The spill caused a ‘slip and fall’ accident for a customer. The jury, in this case, held Costco liable because it had a chance to take necessary measures to avoid the accident. In another case involving the same company in California, the company was not held liable for the fall of a woman who slipped on food that had dropped on the floor. Costco employees had taken the necessary steps to avoid any accident by conducting hourly floor inspections (Ursin, 2013). In the instance case, Green Grocers Inc. had taken the necessary steps to ensure safety. The banana peel was fresh, indicating that it had just been dropped. Therefore, the company could not be assumed to have been negligent, as there was no proof that the workers had failed to remove the peel intentionally. Moreover, the victim was wearing high heels, meaning that there was a chance that the heels contributed to the accident. In this scenario, mediation would be the most effective alternative dispute resolution mechanism to come up with a common solution. The first step would involve finding a common ground on which both parties would be satisfied. This would save them the expenses incurred in litigation. The parties would discuss the circumstances of the case and form an agreement, whose terms they would agree to. Each of the parties would be represented by lawyers. Mediation is usually the middle ground between informal settlement and a formal lawsuit (Meiners, Ringleb, & Edwards, 2014). The parties would settle on a specific amount to be paid without having to go to court. They would find a neutral party to preside over the case. This neutral party would hear both sides of the case and ensure that there are no misleading facts are adduced for use in this process. The decision made must be satisfactory to both parties. Therefore, the neutral party would ensure there is no bias (Goldman & Sigismond, 2013). Whether a Service Provider is an Independent Contractor or an Employee It is important for a business, whether big or small, to clearly define the relationship between itself and the people who provide it with services. Therefore, a business should distinguish between its employees and independent contractors. Failure to establish the relationship can cost the business unnecessary expenses. The main test used in common law to determine whether a service provider is an employee is the degree of control the business has over the provider. A business does not have absolute control over an independent contractor, but it only requests a task b