Claimant worked for Hello World Language Center, Inc. as a part-time instructor for several months in 2004. She applied for unemployment insurance benefits the following year after her job with a subsequent employer ended. The Commissioner of Labor determined that Hello World was liable for additional unemployment insurance contributions because claimant and all other similarly situated part-time instructors were employees rather than independent contractors. Hello World's objection to that determination was sustained by an Administrative Law Judge following a hearing. Upon review, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed, prompting this appeal.
We affirm. A determination identifying professional workers as employees will be upheld if substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that the employer had "control over important aspects of the services performed" ( Matter of Concourse Ophthalmology Assoc. [Roberts], 60 NY2d 734, 736), "even if the workers retain control over their work product and the means of crafting it" ( Matter of Troy Publ. Co. [Hudacs], 228 AD2d 877, 878, lv denied 89 NY2d 803). Here, claimant testified that she was subjected to a performance review and that Hello World provided her with feedback after observing her in the classroom. She was required to maintain a daily teaching log, which reflected what materials she covered in a given class and provided verification to Hello World as to who was present, including claimant. She was also required to submit a time sheet to Hello World, which would pay her on an hourly rate out of funds that it collected directly from students. Finally, Hello World provided a stipend for class materials and the use of a photocopier, and established the schedule of classes that claimant taught. Accordingly, "notwithstanding the existence of a written contract identifying claimant as an independent contractor and other evidence in the record that could support a contrary result" ( Matter of Wright [Central Transp., Inc. — Commissioner of Labor], 58 AD3d 988, 989-990, lv dismissed 12 NY3d 843), substantial evidence supports the Board's determination that an employer-employee relationship existed ( Matter of Fitness Plus [Commissioner of Labor], 293 AD2d 909, 910). Hello World's remaining contentions have been reviewed and are determined to be without merit.
Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.