IPSE Magazine

[malvolio]

4.5 million votes for what? It has nothing to do with elitism (any more than identifying categories of self-employed people that IPSE might prefer). Rather, it's an issue of scale versus relevance, i.e. smaller and more relevant versus larger and less relevant. Anyway, a lot of this remains to be seen. For now, I'll remain a member while the concrete benefits exceed the costs.

"Larger and less Relevant"? FFS, we're dealing with politicians. Size is more than important.

[tractor]

...

"Larger and less Relevant"? FFS, we're dealing with politicians. Size is more than important.

I have to agree with that.

What I don't agree with is a new 'one size fits all' corporate model and I have yet to see any convincing reasoning over merged Tax/NI.

[Taita]

Really, I do understand the difference. That is the issue. Once we accept this new corporate vehicle that everyone is talking about (Labour, Tories, HMRC & IPSE) we are coralled away from our limited protections and our traditional way of working.

The biggest issue that I have is that the people in the know (above) are not sharing what they are proposing. If there is going to be no difference to what we have now, why is another type of corporate vehicle needed.

There are very clear distinctions between freelance aspiring (and real) 'professionals' i.e. 'knowledge' workers and self-employed 'tradesmen' despite the common use of limited companies.

Can one body adequately and without undue compromise represent the two groups which currently are regarded quite differently by Treasury/HMRC?

[malvolio]

There are very clear distinctions between freelance aspiring (and real) 'professionals' i.e. 'knowledge' workers and self-employed 'tradesmen' despite the common use of limited companies.

Can one body adequately and without undue compromise represent the two groups which currently are regarded quite differently by Treasury/HMRC?

But that's not what they're trying to do. Do keep up.

[tractor]

...

But that's not what they're trying to do. Do keep up.

You have to understand that you cannot keep blaming the audience for not getting 'the message'

At some point you have to consider whether the message is phrased correctly. I have to admit aside from the strength in numbers part, I don't get it either.

[TheFaQQer]

But that's not what they're trying to do. Do keep up.

As I asked earlier - aren't builders etc. part of the 4.5 million that IPSE claims to represent?

[jamesbrown]

"Larger and less Relevant"? FFS, we're dealing with politicians. Size is more than important.

It's only important if the message is worth something to contractors. You seem to be implying that contractors and the self-employed are perfectly aligned in what they want. Because if they aren't, and IPSE is driven by its members, it seems pretty obvious to me that the narrower audience of "IT contractors and engineers" will be drowned out.

[malvolio]

Let's put this another way. IPSE's CEO, Chris Bryce, appeared at the Lords' inquiry into IR35 recently. Introduced as coming from the Professional Contractors Group, their noble lords immediately welcomed him as representing the building trades.

Yes, there are 4.5 million non-employees out there. Roughly half are what we would call knowledge-based economy workers, as opposed to the other skilled trades, shop owners and the like. We would expect the former group to be potential IPSE members and not the second. However, if IPSE can say its membership covers over 2 million workers, it can realistically be said to be representing the views of non-employed workers, with rather more justification than it can with 22,000 members. Nobody that matters will worry about who the 2 million actually are.

[jamesbrown]

Let's put this another way. IPSE's CEO, Chris Bryce, appeared at the Lords' inquiry into IR35 recently. Introduced as coming from the Professional Contractors Group, their noble lords immediately welcomed him as representing the building trades.

Yes, there are 4.5 million non-employees out there. Roughly half are what we would call knowledge-based economy workers, as opposed to the other skilled trades, shop owners and the like. We would expect the former group to be potential IPSE members and not the second. However, if IPSE can say its membership covers over 2 million workers, it can realistically be said to be representing the views of non-employed workers, with rather more justification than it can with 22,000 members. Nobody that matters will worry about who the 2 million actually are.

OK, that's a fair point. Not sure how I missed that little gem in the TV coverage, but anyway, I watched the coverage in full... your average punter probably would associate a contractor with someone from the building trade. Also, I'm pretty ambivalent about the branding; whatever achieves the desired effect. This is more a question about the consistency and relevance of the message when "IT contractors and engineers" are supposedly at the core of the strategy and yet only represent a tiny fraction of the target audience (whether that's 2 million or 4.5 million). Anyway, I think this dead horse is truly flogged.

[RasputinDude]

Mal, I totally get where you are coming from with that description. And it is a very valid point indeed. I know a couple of people who have been in the CC - so I understand the effort that they put in - and I don't want to denigrate IPSE at all. However - and it is a big however - if IPSE is still representing me personally then I can't see it and the message needs to change.

NewLabour were great at the argument of "you don't understand what we are trying to - you haven't got the right message" - I would hate to see IPSE following that MO. Change the bloody message then - and make sure that your core understands rather than just assuming that they'll either get it or just shut up and pay up.

As this is now being played out in public, I think that it is only right for me to repeat Chris Bryce's post on the internal PCG forum:

I can categorically and unequivocally assure you that IPSE is not leaving IT contractors or engineers behind in any way. Our core membership is, and always will be, absolutely at the heart of what we do.

What we are doing is trying to broaden our membership base and part of this involves some change of emphasis and messaging some of the time. Naturally some people might feel that that in itself is IPSE "abandoning" them, but realistically it's easy to feel that way when you're not seeing messages exclusive to your sector.

You, and all the other IT and engineering contractors will continue to receive from IPSE what we've always done as PCG in terms of information, benefits, and, crucially, the efforts IPSE makes to ensure that your businesses are treated fairly by HMG.