IR35 letters going out to GlaxoSmithKline contractors

[BlueSharp]

For webberg, it maybe different now but GSK used to use two agencies, SRG and Kelly. They streamlined from many agencies to those two a while ago, so it may have changed since. Like I said before, at GSK, they just put you through the sausage machine, you turned up, did as you were told and left when they'd had enough of you. Simply a temporary resource, nothing more nothing less and certainly nothing special. Hundreds of contractors on all their facilities. From memory when I was there I'd say maybe 50% of people on site for GSK were agency workers. Often I was surprised at who they were and what they did. Anything and everything, just like a GSK staff person did.

So no MOO then?

[Invisiblehand]

Is there a "group"?

Good question actually. From what I've seen on twitter it looks like Mr Chaplin is putting together a team of some sorts.

With regards to the rest of your post, I absolutely agree.

[Fred Bloggs]

So no MOO then?

They had a habit of doing the same to staff folks too as they are one of those companies that continuously reorganises to give the impression of progress. So staff regularly got the option to get a pay off and leave. What became a problem though for many at GSK was that the company share plan was so generous, many were trapped there by having so much potential capital tied up in the various share save plans

[BlueSharp]

Good question actually. From what I've seen on twitter it looks like Mr Chaplin is putting together a team of some sorts.

With regards to the rest of your post, I absolutely agree.

Ten years ago a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a HMRC court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum-security stockade to the Brentford underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as consultants of fortune. If you have a problem... if no one else can help... and if you can find them... maybe you can hire... The DC-Team

[Invisiblehand]

Ten years ago a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a HMRC court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum-security stockade to the Brentford underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as consultants of fortune. If you have a problem... if no one else can help... and if you can find them... maybe you can hire... The DC-Team

Ha.

[Lance]

So no MOO then?

I wouldn't want to rely on that as my defense against an IR35 tribunal.
If as described and I was investigated I'd poo myself a little.

[WordIsBond]

They had a habit of doing the same to staff folks too as they are one of those companies that continuously reorganises to give the impression of progress. So staff regularly got the option to get a pay off and leave. What became a problem though for many at GSK was that the company share plan was so generous, many were trapped there by having so much potential capital tied up in the various share save plans

If it was the same then I assume the contractors had an option and would get a pay off.

No? Oh, then maybe it wasn't the same and maybe the contractors felt that option and pay off was rather a substantive difference. Maybe you didn't think so, but most would.

In fact, most would think that the fact that they were willing to take the risk of exactly that, no MOO with no option and no payoff, is exactly the main thing that sets them off from employees and means, in fact, that they ARE running a business. They've decided to set up on their own and provide services as a company, taking on the risk of not being employed.

And not only does IR35 tax them punitively, more than employees are taxed, it says to them that your willingness to take that risk is of no value to the government at all.

[Liberator]

They had a habit of doing the same to staff folks too as they are one of those companies that continuously reorganises to give the impression of progress. So staff regularly got the option to get a pay off and leave. What became a problem though for many at GSK was that the company share plan was so generous, many were trapped there by having so much potential capital tied up in the various share save plans

It's not quite that simple to get rid of a permie at GSK. Yes there were reorgs but you have to go through a formal legal process to make someone redundant. You don't just pay them off. It's actually very hard to get rid of a permanent employee if they're just not very good. A contractor on the other hand can just be told not to come in next week and I've seen that happen. I'm not saying that means that all GSK contractors can't be caught by IR35 according to the HMRC but it is a major distinct difference.

[Fred Bloggs]

It's not quite that simple to get rid of a permie at GSK. Yes there were reorgs but you have to go through a formal legal process to make someone redundant. You don't just pay them off. It's actually very hard to get rid of a permanent employee if they're just not very good. A contractor on the other hand can just be told not to come in next week and I've seen that happen. I'm not saying that means that all GSK contractors can't be caught by IR35 according to the HMRC but it is a major distinct difference.

Sorry, nobody mentioned redundancies. Red herring. Anyone who left GSK did so of their own accord on voluntary severance terms. They were generous back then. Things may have changed now.

[Fred Bloggs]

If it was the same then I assume the contractors had an option and would get a pay off.

No? Oh, then maybe it wasn't the same and maybe the contractors felt that option and pay off was rather a substantive difference. Maybe you didn't think so, but most would.

In fact, most would think that the fact that they were willing to take the risk of exactly that, no MOO with no option and no payoff, is exactly the main thing that sets them off from employees and means, in fact, that they ARE running a business. They've decided to set up on their own and provide services as a company, taking on the risk of not being employed.

And not only does IR35 tax them punitively, more than employees are taxed, it says to them that your willingness to take that risk is of no value to the government at all.

It's getting rather tiresome now, but one last attempt. That's yesterday's pleading of "I run a real bizniz, I'm IR35 exempt". There's nothing here that hasn't been wheeled out a zillion times. Times have changed. Try a new argument if you can find one. "It's not fair on us poor victimised agency workers" isn't working. Sorry.