Mal is right, you know...
-
"I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
- Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank... -
Rule 1: Mal is always right.
Rule 2: When Mal is wrong, Rule #1 shall apply.
That appeared on a Lotus BB I used at one site a few years back. Another entry was "Why bother making it idiotproof? They'll just invent a better class of idiot."Blog? What blog...?
Comment
-
YesOriginally posted by malvolio
I understand this.Originally posted by malvolio
A perm often doesn't get paid if he just decides not to turn up.
Some perms don't get paid for Xmas.
Perms get paid holidays. But having a contract not giving the worker holidays doesn't make one outside of IR35.
timComment
-
Huh? A perm not turning up is a perm not fulfilling his contract to do the work he has been allocated, that's why he doesn't get paid (or he takes it as leave/sick), usually as a penalty for dereliction. They rarely get forced to take Christmas unpaid, it's merely deducted from their annual leave. That is not the same as me not charging for a day I'm not working for the client and the client has no obligation to pay me if I don't work, or if there is no work for me to do. Big difference.
Holidays are paid, always, if you're a perm, because your employer has to allow you a certain amount of time off; the cost merely gets rolled up in your annual salary. He is under no such obligation with me, I can work whatever days I need to do the job
Don't try and use employee arguments to describe contractor behaviour. You will only end up getting confused, as you have so ably demonstrated.Blog? What blog...?Comment
-
I don't agree. I understand the difference completely.Originally posted by malvolio
Not getting paid, for not turning up proves absolutely nothing wrt IR35. Some perms can do this. It is not a strong indicator.
And holidays are completely irrelevent. The IR35 test makes them so. Argueing that having employee benefits makes you an employee and not having them make you not one is a circular arguement. The IR35 tests ignores this and looks at other indicators to decide.
timComment
-
The primary IR35 tests are the three detailed earlier, MOO, RoS and D&C. Getting paid is not about turning up, it's about doing contracted-for work and if an employee fails to appear one day, he's not doing it and is penalised as a rsult. But hat is not Mutuality of Obligation.
The MOO test is if they have to pay you just for being at work, which they do for employees but not (normallly) for contractors, or if they have to pay you when there is no work for you to do wherever you're sat at the time - which, incidentally, is why you don't want a notice period in your contract.Blog? What blog...?Comment
-
Yes, I know all this, thank you.
But my point was, and still is, that not getting paid for a day taken off adds nothing to the arguement. It matter's not that the client instructs you before-hand that you may not work on a particular day.
timComment
-
It does. It is at the heart of the MOO discussion. Ho hum...Blog? What blog...?Comment
-
Atlantic Umbrella
With reference to the query at Atlantic Umbrella and are they any good?
Well in a nutshell, No is the answer. I have been using them for many years and have been let down many times by them.
It seems if you have a simple query like can I change my address then these will be dealt with quickly but if you have a money question then you will be ignored.
And really, unless you want to be an absolutely laughing stock of the Atlantic Umbrella offices, do not ask them to explain how they equate your monies. This is a black box mechanism. You do are not allowed to ask about the variables, you get what they give you.
Sorry for the sourness but do not be fooled by the glossy web site.
Now off to bang my head against a wall some more.
Comment
-
I have never had any problems with them, and I am one of the unluckiest people aliveComment
Comment