Working time directive nonsense from agency

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

As long as your contract reflects reality I can't see that you'll have a problem

[tractor]

...

It's common for permanent staff in my industry to sign an opt out (less common for >48/hours to actually happen).

I think the agency just doesn't understand and is trying to cover themselves.

Since it's actual employment law surely any agreement between me and the agency suggests that kind of relationship exists, hence is a potential IR35 issue...

I am sure that this is it.

Since the gov got caught with its pants down over interims and contractors and all the bad press that ensued, it seems corporate lawyers are generating their own FUD and it has permeated the private sector now, hence all the rectum covering nonsense with this years' Finance Act and ITEPA wrt the self employed loophole. I have had two instances of this type of thing this year and neither agency would back down, even though they talk patent nonsense from the sourcing oik to the MD on both occasions. Their stance appears to be 'lawyer advice = non-negotiable'

If it's a choice of take it or leave it and you really want the gig, I would sign it subject to caveat to the effect of 'I don't consider it applies to me or Myco and I have complied only to the extent that it is a condition of contract acceptance'