What's all this then??????

[Cowboy Bob]

Good idea (excellent idea in fact if it stops newbies getting burned), good way to track down potential candidates for educating on why they should move to "proper" company ownership, crap PR.

No, it's not a good idea. A good idea would be for them to enter into partnership with an accountancy firm to help newbies set-up their own limited. To be recommending ANY kind of brolly is effectively helping to increase the profits of that umbrella company. Whether said brolly is one of "the good guys" or not is utterly irrelevant. The PCG is turning into a commercial enterprise under the guise of being a representative of the contractor community. This is not what it was originally set-up for.

[malvolio]

Well yes, I take your point. The counter argument (that I don't fully agree with) is that there is a clear and consistent demand for umbrella services so we may as well have one that sticks to the rules and brings people into contact with the PCG so they can be indoctrinated properly. As I said, you can get the same effect by accreditation. However, by doing nothing, you lose the "talk to the PCG" opportunity and leave the market open to anyone, which is where we are now - and let's face it, if all the umbrellas were 100% honest and charging modest and reasonable fees, we wouldn't be arguing about them at all...

[John Galt]

Well yes, I take your point. The counter argument (that I don't fully agree with) is that there is a clear and consistent demand for umbrella services so we may as well have one that sticks to the rules and brings people into contact with the PCG so they can be indoctrinated properly. As I said, you can get the same effect by accreditation. However, by doing nothing, you lose the "talk to the PCG" opportunity and leave the market open to anyone, which is where we are now - and let's face it, if all the umbrellas were 100% honest and charging modest and reasonable fees, we wouldn't be arguing about them at all...

Well then, wouldn't the best thing to have done would be to write a guide for newbies telling them what to look out for - in this way they would know the good guys from the bad guys straight away. Basically IMHO it is sheer laziness - rather than research brollies they've just picked one and let's face it, it wasn't long ago that Parasol were getting a right hammering on this very forum because their service levels sucked.

[malvolio]

Well then, wouldn't the best thing to have done would be to write a guide for newbies telling them what to look out for - in this way they would know the good guys from the bad guys straight away.

A short term cockup by someone who didn't understand the basics of change management. Prior to that they were consistenly one of the two most recommended ones to use, even by the guys on here. We've tried education on hear over the last year or so and people are still joining the bad guys and asking (or even promoting!) offshore and composites. Never underestimate the ability of people to make stupid decisions

Basically IMHO it is sheer laziness - rather than research brollies they've just picked one and let's face it, it wasn't long ago that Parasol were getting a right hammering on this very forum because their service levels sucked.

Doubt that - they have pretty tight due diligence procedures these days, ever since people started asking questions about how the money was being spent.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea, and I don't think many PCGers do either, but I am fairly confident it's been done properly and honestly on both sides.

[John Galt]

Yes, but the point of an organisation like the PCG is to tell people why these dodgy schemes are a bad idea - if they still go ahead and use them then on their own head be it.

Anyway, as you say regardless of how it was done I don't think many of us are too happy about it and, let's face it, we are the paying public.