So, would I be inside IR35

[Denny]

Well we could start with the bleedin' obvious, that the PCG 's sole purpose is not to get rid of IR35. That's what Shout99/PCG Mk1 was set up to do and singularly failed.

No wonder you can't get on with them if you can't even work out what they are trying to achieve.

I quote from the PCG objectives:

"PCG's aim is to be the voice of freelancers, working with Government and industry to protect and promote freelancing and freelancers, on a local, national and European level.

PCG seeks to be the heart of the freelance community, supporting and nurturing its members through all parts of the freelance life cycle, as well as offering commercial support, fostering peer support and encouraging new ways of working."

I think you are sidetracking this issue, and not very wisely either, if one of the principle specific objective (as listed on the site but not above) is to increase membership.

PCG is associated with ir35. Make no mistake about that. That is what most, if not all members, join for - for the insurance and for them to tackle cases on ir35 and lobby for it's repeal.

It says quite categorically that it is there to promote freelancers and freelancing [sorry this is going to turn into another essay....but bear with me]

Well freelancers are not made up of contractors, as defined by one man band limited companies or brolly payees. Why is the term contractor used in its title but the objectives state they are about 'freelancers.' The two terms are at odds with one another and contradict each other accordingly. Freelancers are sole traders, not limited companies. They are not in any way impacted by ir35 because they pay full taxes on their drawings anyway.

The terms Professional Contractors Group is also a misnomer. What is a Professional Contractor? I've asked you this already today. There is no listing in the PCG objectives that the term is supposed to turn the organisation into a professional trade association with certain rules of conduct and practice in order to operate as a contractor. One poster has suggested that this should happen, so that clearly is the case as things currently stand. So the term Professional is a meaningless add on with no definition of what exactly a professional contractor is as opposed to a non professional contractor. So the term 'professional' as a definition is unclear. Not so with the Law Society or ACCA or some other similar professional body who don't even use 'professional' in the acronym who use their professional bodies as mandatory to operate in their fields. Hence, there is no mandatory association we have to join to operate as professional contractors. If it did serve this purpose the title PCG would make sense.

As it is, most contractors can rejig their CV and pass themselves off as anything they want provided they get through the interview. This is hardly what I would regard as a 'professional.' It seems that the PCG are simply using the term 'professional' to mean 'something we get paid for.' Well so do most employees of other organisations get paid for what they do too. So should they call themselves professional sales assistants, professional bank tellers, professional secretaries, professional window cleaners etc. Should a sole trader now call themselves 'professional plumbers?'

Lastly, the term Professional Contractor panders to the belief that a 'contractor' is an individual not a supplier company, despite their efforts to carry the banner of ir35 matters as perceived by most, if not all their members (as carried over from Mark I). Yet Accenture, for example of a big consultancy, and other big companies who supply big clients by planting their staff in them and who operate in fields that IT consultants or others could compete with, are also contractors but they too are not affected by ir35 issues. I don't see many representatives from Accenture or some other consultancy not affected by ir35 posting on there because it is about servicing 'professional contractors.'

The PCG has an identity crises and it has been hijacked by those serving the IT industry precisely because of the ir35 issues the organisation was originally associated with, and which you now claim has nothing to do with the purpose of the organisation.

I hope Sally Anne is reading this, based on her earlier enquiry.... [well, I hope she got that far down the post without giving up]

To promote the PCG as an organisation worth paying for because of the ir35 insurance 'as a no brainer' as you've quoted on many occasionas Mal is surely fraudulent if you are now claiming that the organisation has no intention of associating itself officially or not with this very important issue.

I would suggest you try and work out exactly what it is supposed to be about and let us know ....

[Ardesco]

To promote the PCG as an organisation worth paying for because of the ir35 insurance 'as a no brainer' is surely fraudulent if you are now claiming that the organisation has no intention of associating itslef officially or not with this very important issue.

I can't be bothered to go through it all but Mal never said the PCG wasn't interested in IR35, he just said that IR35 is not its sole reason for being in existance any more.

I would take that to mean that it has grown and now wants to be involved in all aspects of a freelancing rather than a narrow focus on IR35. As the sole focus is not longer get rid of IR35 it is entirely reasonable that some members may feel that the IR35 fight is no longer worth the hassle, and they want to move onto other things instead. It is up to the other members to encourage them otherwise.

[malvolio]

I know what's it's about, I helped put it there. And it's a lot bigger than IR35.

I know who its membership is as well - roughly 50% IT, most of the rest in Engineering and O&G, and we're opening other areas all the time. Also, a good percentage of the membership are not OMBs in the sense you mean it. And I disagree with your interpretation of freelance - we use the original meaning of someone whose skills are for hire on the open market - and we prefer the term contractor anyway (hence PCG...), and we don't care what vehicle that person trades through - LtdCo, LLP, sole trader (ever hear of PCG Solo?), even companies up to 15 employees.

So go learn the correct facts, then apply your intellect, not the other way round.

[Denny]

I know what's it's about, I helped put it there. And it's a lot bigger than IR35.

I know who its membership is as well - roughly 50% IT, most of the rest in Engineering and O&G, and we're opening other areas all the time. Also, a good percentage of the membership are not OMBs in the sense you mean it. And I disagree with your interpretation of freelance - we use the original meaning of someone whose skills are for hire on the open market - and we prefer the term contractor anyway (hence PCG...), and we don't care what vehicle that person trades through - LtdCo, LLP, sole trader (ever hear of PCG Solo?), even companies up to 15 employees.

So go learn the correct facts, then apply your intellect, not the other way round.

That may be what its intentions are but that is not how it is perceived. Someone got booted off the PCG board, when I first joined under Suze, because he made some insulting remark that stated that the place has been hijacked by geeks' or something like that. It's all very well stating that membership can comprise all of these other groups but the PCG is associated with ir35 (which you've now acknowledged in this last post, but denied in the original one).

I think that speaks for itself.

Something I do know a lot about - professionally - is that perception is often a more important tool for defining what should comprise the content of official marketed communication than stated objectives independent of member perceptions.

Your positioning and stated aims for the PCG are very confusing. As, may I add, is your stance on whether ir35 is dead or not. You claimed in your past posts about this, in direct contradiction to me, that you had NOT claimed that ir35 tax was 'dead' but was 'voluntary.' Well, what is the difference? There is no difference. If the tax was dead then there would be no point is saying it is voluntary as there would be none to pay anyway voluntarily or otherwise. If it is 'alive' then it is certainly not 'voluntary.' Try telling the owners of Dragonfly that now that they've not been presented with a huge back tax bill of 99K. So it's either dead and irrelevant or else it's 'alive' and not voluntary. It can't be 'not dead' but 'voluntary' as you claimed when you said: "I didn't say it was dead I said it was voluntary."

Back to the drawing board, Mal. You make no sense at all.

[malvolio]

That may be what its intentions are but that is not how it is perceived. Someone got booted off the PCG board, when I first joined under Suze, because he made some insulting remark that stated that the place has been hijacked by geeks' or something like that. It's all very well stating that membership can comprise all of these other groups but the PCG is associated with ir35 (which you've now acknowledged in this last post, but denied in the original one).

I think that speaks for itself.

Something I do know a lot about - professionally - is that perception is often a more important tool for defining what should comprise the content of official marketed communication than stated objectives independent of member perceptions.

Your positioning and stated aims for the PCG are very confusing. As, may I add, is your stance on whether ir35 is dead or not. You claimed in your past posts about this, in direct contradiction to me, that you had NOT claimed that ir35 tax was 'dead' but was 'voluntary.' Well, what is the difference? There is no difference. If the tax was dead then there would be no point is saying it is voluntary as there would be none to pay anyway voluntarily or otherwise. If it is 'alive' then it is certainly not 'voluntary.' Try telling the owners of Dragonfly that now that they've not been presented with a huge back tax bill of 99K. So it's either dead and irrelevant or else it's 'alive' and not voluntary. It can't be 'not dead' but 'voluntary' as you claimed when you said: "I didn't say it was dead I said it was voluntary."

Back to the drawing board, Mal. You make no sense at all.

Fine. It all falls down if the perception is wrong though, which yours is. None of the above is true, or even faintly accurate. Go back to your knitting or something, you're wasting everyone's time now.

[Ardesco]

So it's either dead and irrelevant or else it's 'alive' and not voluntary. It can't be 'not dead' but 'voluntary' as you claimed when you said: "I didn't say it was dead I said it was voluntary."

Back to the drawing board, Mal. You make no sense at all.

Pot.. Kettle... BLACK!

[NotAllThere]

Pot.. Kettle... BLACK!

It's ever so simple. If Denny can't understand something, it must be because either:

a) It's badly presented or b) It isn't worth understanding.

Option c) is just untenable.

[Archangel]

<snip> another load of twadle <snip>

The terms Professional Contractors Group is also a misnomer. What is a Professional Contractor?


<snip> another load of twadle <snip>

Perhaps it is a Professional Group for contractors?

(is that a split infinitive?)

[Denny]

I note that none of the last few comments have been counterargued on any rational grounds nor my arguments disproved as nonsense. Only the usual snide personal remarks that comes from people who have nothing to say - punctuated by the usual sexist carp.

[oracleslave]

the usual sexist carp.