Conduct Regulations 2003: opt in/opt out?

[SueEllen]

In more recent years, though, I would imagine?

Yep.

[dwater]

define 'control'

I'm still a little confused about the aspect of 'control'.

Clearly the client tells me what they want to achieve by them engaging my services. This would mostly be established during an interview which I look at as more of an initial consultancy. They describe their problem and I get a better idea of what they want doing and if I have the skills they are looking for. During the discussion, they gain confidence that you have the skills and can solve their problem, or not, and decide to proceed accordingly.

When you turn up for the first day, they are clearly going to have some kind of control - sit there, talk to that person, do this, do that. They don't have the skills you have, so once you get going on their problem, then you're on your own more.

However, if something happens with the project - eg cancelled, or things dry up so you haven't enough work to keep you busy - then clearly they can simply instruct you to go and stop the contract.

That's lots of 'control' as far as I can see. I don't think they can tell me to do some work that is unrelated to the work they originally engaged me for...is that the sort of 'control' people are talking about here?

I realise that, as an employee (of my own company), I am ultimately under the control of my director (happens to also be me). It seems like any control that concerns the work in the contract is done via the director of my company, rather than the employee, and the director then tells the employee to go home...so there is no direct control.

...or is it that the client tells the agency that they want something to change (the 'control') and they then tell me/director and the director tells me/employee?

It's all a bit convoluted, but it does seem worthwhile getting these different roles clear.

[northernladuk]

Cancelling the contract isn't really control. That's more about the commercial agreements between you and the client. That said remember your contract is likely to be with an agent so you wouldn't have any contractual relationship with the client. It's more the agent controlling the contract.

Your second example of the client telling you what to do and being able to give you work above and beyond your contract is a good example of control.

The control meaning you attend monthly meetings, you follow their process or fill in their templates isn't really can issue. Nothing wrong with falling in line to follow client process as long as you keep an eye on not becoming part and parcel and attending things you shouldn't really be at. You work for the client so of course there will be some element of 'control' as to how the work is delivered. Just need to be careful with it though.

Nice article describing what it is and how to mitigate it here.

http://www.contractoruk.com/successf...need_know.html

[BlasterBates]

I'm still a little confused about the aspect of 'control'.

Clearly the client tells me what they want to achieve by them engaging my services. This would mostly be established during an interview which I look at as more of an initial consultancy. They describe their problem and I get a better idea of what they want doing and if I have the skills they are looking for. During the discussion, they gain confidence that you have the skills and can solve their problem, or not, and decide to proceed accordingly.

When you turn up for the first day, they are clearly going to have some kind of control - sit there, talk to that person, do this, do that. They don't have the skills you have, so once you get going on their problem, then you're on your own more.

However, if something happens with the project - eg cancelled, or things dry up so you haven't enough work to keep you busy - then clearly they can simply instruct you to go and stop the contract.

That's lots of 'control' as far as I can see. I don't think they can tell me to do some work that is unrelated to the work they originally engaged me for...is that the sort of 'control' people are talking about here?

I realise that, as an employee (of my own company), I am ultimately under the control of my director (happens to also be me). It seems like any control that concerns the work in the contract is done via the director of my company, rather than the employee, and the director then tells the employee to go home...so there is no direct control.

...or is it that the client tells the agency that they want something to change (the 'control') and they then tell me/director and the director tells me/employee?

It's all a bit convoluted, but it does seem worthwhile getting these different roles clear.

There are quite a lot of contractors who are clearly not in control but try to argue they are. If you are in control then you know it. As a "contractor" I was personally never in control I was told to do things though I had a contract as if I was. I have a small income as a musician and there I really am in control, I decide who the musicians are, I decide what we play, if a musician doesn't turn up I get another one. Basically yes you have to fit in with the customer but you should be controlling the consultancy i.e. telling the customer what people you need to speak to, in the same way when the decorator comes in to your house he tells you how he will work, you just ask him to paint the room. I also used to work for a consultancy and we decided how we did the work, who did it and when we worked on it.

To be honest if you're not sure whether you're in control then probably you aren't. However for tax purposes just make sure you have an IR35 compliant contract and you will probably get the benefit of the doubt.