HR asking for VDU questionnaire, passport & utility bill. IR35 issues ?

[SteelyDan]

[QUOTE=TheFaQQer;1960753]When they call a plumber to fix the loo, do they ask him to provide his passport to confirm he is eligible to work in the UK, or do they trust that his employer has done this? QUOTE]

I think we both know that this analogy doesn't cut it, especially given the way most of us seek work & operate generally.

A plumber isn't going to be on site for weeks/months; he's there to do a one-off job, maybe lasting a couple of hours. Plus, he probably belongs to an organisation which is on the orgs PSL for the supply of these types of services, much like the printer is knackered, call the service organisation and get them to come out and fix it.

Contractors, operating in the way which most of us do, are not on a PSL (unless you are working direct & have done on a repeated basis, then you may well be) as we (in the main) are contracted thru agencies, even though we operate (in most cases) via our own Ltd Cos. I don't hear of many plumbers needing to go thru agencies, having interviews with the end client, then given the (2 hour) job...totally unworkable, much like your analogy.

I personally don't have any issues with providing passport details/copies to the hiring org, and any that do have problems with it, are (IMHO)verging on hysteria and paranoia. We've all got a crust to earn, and bills to pay, so why get hysterical about, what are frankly, non-issues, & risk alienating yourself with your client? After all, unlike the plumber, you might be there for some time, contractually.

[tractor]

...

[QUOTE=SteelyDan;1960791]

When they call a plumber to fix the loo, do they ask him to provide his passport to confirm he is eligible to work in the UK, or do they trust that his employer has done this? QUOTE]

I think we both know that this analogy doesn't cut it, especially given the way most of us seek work & operate generally.

A plumber isn't going to be on site for weeks/months; he's there to do a one-off job, maybe lasting a couple of hours. Plus, he probably belongs to an organisation which is on the orgs PSL for the supply of these types of services, much like the printer is knackered, call the service organisation and get them to come out and fix it.

Contractors, operating in the way which most of us do, are not on a PSL (unless you are working direct & have done on a repeated basis, then you may well be) as we (in the main) are contracted thru agencies, even though we operate (in most cases) via our own Ltd Cos. I don't hear of many plumbers needing to go thru agencies, having interviews with the end client, then given the (2 hour) job...totally unworkable, much like your analogy.

I personally don't have any issues with providing passport details/copies to the hiring org, and any that do have problems with it, are (IMHO)verging on hysteria and paranoia. We've all got a crust to earn, and bills to pay, so why get hysterical about, what are frankly, non-issues, & risk alienating yourself with your client? After all, unlike the plumber, you might be there for some time, contractually.

For some organisations esp councils and other public sector orgs, even PSL tradesmen whether they are subcontractors or they work for huge FM providers are required to fill in forms, questionnaires and the like for situations like working at height, asbestos, risk assessments, site work permits etc. These are all H & S requirements and are more important now than ever with the changes to legislation covering personal liability and corporate manslaughter.

[SteelyDan]

[QUOTE=tractor;1960798]

For some organisations esp councils and other public sector orgs, even PSL tradesmen whether they are subcontractors or they work for huge FM providers are required to fill in forms, questionnaires and the like for situations like working at height, asbestos, risk assessments, site work permits etc. These are all H & S requirements and are more important now than ever with the changes to legislation covering personal liability and corporate manslaughter.

Not disputing any of that.

[tractor]

...

[QUOTE=SteelyDan;1960799]

Not disputing any of that.

I understand, just furthering the discussion in that just because a client asks a supplier to help with their compliance, it is not extraordinary nor is it a pointer to anything

[AvsFan]

+1 to that. The fact it's a bit late is odd but it's not something to cause an issue over.

Same with the passport. Company are under the threat of severe penalties for not proving their staff, or anyone working for them is eligible to do so. Can't fault them for wanting to try to cover themselves. Some of them do it better than others. As long as they can confirm my details will be dealt with as per the DP laws then am happy to provide a copy.

What does surprise me is when people bring IR35 in to everything without even attempting to understand it properly. If they can't understand questions like this they prove they know nothing and therefor are not a business. Trying and failing is doing them more damage than ignoring it all completely. Trying to act outside IR35 just by ticking boxes and having a vague understanding is nigh on useless.

If IR35 was really that clear then there wouldn't be so much confusion about it and and so many posts about it. I doubt very much whether anyone including HMRC never mind yourself understands IR35 completely. Any issues where potentially you could be seen as a 'disguised employee' are potentially valid so I don't see this as clear cut as you seem to make out. HMRC will use any potential information they can to prove you are a disguised employee if they wish to prove you are inside IR35 and this could be one of those points that weigh in their favour. Just because others have provided their passports, proof of address in the past to the client doesn't make it correct as they may not have been under an IR35 investigation yet. If you don't understand that then I suggest you are not a business.

[AvsFan]

Some valid points as usual.

There's no hysteria or paranoia about the IR35 issue. I feel it was a valid question to ask. If I'd originally posted that HR wanted me to fill out a DSE compliance form and requested passport/utility bill and should I send it it, people would rightly be asking what the heck is the post for ! The question was - does this have IR35 implications as we all know the legislation is very confusing.
I agree that on the one hand you don't want to fall out with HR (and I have no intention of doing so). My post was just to gauge an understanding of others experience (which is what this forum is for).http://forums.contractoruk.com/images/smilies/eek2.gif

My feeling is that I will fill out the DSE compliance, but refer HR politely to the Agency who already have my passport details if they wish to verify such questions (contrary to others I have a very good agency). If they insist on me providing the details then I think the advice from one of the posters is to provide the info but document it "... including your objections and keep it with your IR35 defence file as part of your audit trail."

What I do find strange is some of the people who reply that they have provided such info and no worries, never been any problem for them. However, if you've never been under an IR35 investigation then you've no 100% confirmation that this couldn't be used against you so just because you've done it and it's never been a problem doesn't really guarantee anything.
And before anyone else makes the accusation of me not understanding IR35 and being not really a business then I challenge anyone to tell me that they fully understand the IR35 rules. After all one thing you should know is that the legislation is very subjective.

I'm just trying to run a good business (and learning along the way like everyone else) and cover my tracks should need be. There's no paranoia in that, it's just good business sense IMHO.
Thanks as usual for all your responses though.

[TheFaQQer]

When they call a plumber to fix the loo, do they ask him to provide his passport to confirm he is eligible to work in the UK, or do they trust that his employer has done this?

I think we both know that this analogy doesn't cut it, especially given the way most of us seek work & operate generally.

A plumber isn't going to be on site for weeks/months; he's there to do a one-off job, maybe lasting a couple of hours. Plus, he probably belongs to an organisation which is on the orgs PSL for the supply of these types of services, much like the printer is knackered, call the service organisation and get them to come out and fix it.

Contractors, operating in the way which most of us do, are not on a PSL (unless you are working direct & have done on a repeated basis, then you may well be) as we (in the main) are contracted thru agencies, even though we operate (in most cases) via our own Ltd Cos. I don't hear of many plumbers needing to go thru agencies, having interviews with the end client, then given the (2 hour) job...totally unworkable, much like your analogy.

And what about the other analogy that you didn't consider:

When they call a plumber to fix the loo, do they ask him to provide his passport to confirm he is eligible to work in the UK, or do they trust that his employer has done this? If they asked Accidenture to provide professional services, do they check all their passports before they start work, or do they assume that the employer has done that already for their employees?

I personally don't have any issues with providing passport details/copies to the hiring org,

Oh

and any that do have problems with it, are (IMHO)verging on hysteria and paranoia. We've all got a crust to earn, and bills to pay, so why get hysterical about, what are frankly, non-issues, & risk alienating yourself with your client?

Can you state, with case evidence, that it's a non-issue for a client to treat you in the same way that they treat their employees, when they wouldn't do the same to other professionals engaged via a consultancy?

After all, unlike the plumber, you might be there for some time, contractually.

Just like many consultants from Accenture, PWC, Oracle, CGEY, Crapita - none of whom the client would ask to see their passport (apart from if it was required for security clearance).

I have no issue with showing the client a form of identity, if there is a genuine business reason that they need to see it - my current client needed to see it before they would put me through internal security clearance and give me access to the right servers.

[northernladuk]

If IR35 was really that clear then there wouldn't be so much confusion about it and and so many posts about it. I doubt very much whether anyone including HMRC never mind yourself understands IR35 completely. Any issues where potentially you could be seen as a 'disguised employee' are potentially valid so I don't see this as clear cut as you seem to make out. HMRC will use any potential information they can to prove you are a disguised employee if they wish to prove you are inside IR35 and this could be one of those points that weigh in their favour. Just because others have provided their passports, proof of address in the past to the client doesn't make it correct as they may not have been under an IR35 investigation yet. If you don't understand that then I suggest you are not a business.

Whilst I kind of agree with some of this by understanding IR35 and acting like a business puts you in a position to be able to understand it enough to make decisions. We know for case law that the big three are the major factors, we also know from case law which ones are pretty small flags.

I do completely disagree with your last comment though. By understanding it incorrectly also suggests you are not a business. As I keep saying, a little knowledge of IR35 is a dangerous thing. Just trying to tick boxes is no acting like a business. Understanding it fully, the levels of risks and what is acceptable and what isn't is about being a business.

Submitting your information to a client who is attempting (rightly or wrongly) meet it's legal obligations is a tiny IR35 issue and so easily defendable it's bordering on insignificant. As long as the OP keeps other evidence such as a contractor pass, meeting invites that contractors can't come to etc then it's a non issue.

[TheFaQQer]

Submitting your information to a client who is attempting (rightly or wrongly) meet it's legal obligations is a tiny IR35 issue and so easily defendable it's bordering on insignificant. As long as the OP keeps other evidence such as a contractor pass, meeting invites that contractors can't come to etc then it's a non issue.

The client asks to verify your passport, in the same way they do for all their employees. The client engages Cap Gemini to provide one project manager. The client does not ask to see her passport, because they are clearly not an employee of the client. The client engages Capita to provide 50 resources. The client does not check any of their passports.

Where is the easy defence from that evidence that the client is viewing the contractor as a supplier rather than an employer?

[TheFaQQer]

Been on a contract for a couple of months now and they've just brought in a new HR person who's sent me an e-mail asking to fill out a VDU assessment and supply my passport to confirm my right to work and utility bill to confirm address.

Tell them that you haven't got a passport, and all the bills are in your wife's name.