No notice period

[northernladuk]

Oh and the IR35 protection bit sounds like typical agency bollox.

It is but they believe it so you need to be careful. You can tell them it's not right until you are blue in the face but if it's been through their legal people and it's their policy they will not enter in to any meaningful discussion with you. They just don't know enough. Similar to clients with 51 week or 2 year periods etc... No point going to town on them about it. It is what it is wrong or right.

[missinggreenfields]

Are you sure that is right. I was under the impression it is zero notice, not can't give notice i.e. instant termination. Employees cannot be instantly terminated which is the differntiator you are after.

An employee cannot have a contract which says that they must stay for all eternity. They must have a notice period which they can give to leave the contract.

In this case, the contract says that the provider cannot leave until the end of the contract. Which could be used as an indicator that the contractor is not an employee.

I think the argument you saw said no notice period, not no notice can be given...

I don't think it did, but thanks for playing

[SlipTheJab]

An employee cannot have a contract which says that they must stay for all eternity. They must have a notice period which they can give to leave the contract.

In this case, the contract says that the provider cannot leave until the end of the contract. Which could be used as an indicator that the contractor is not an employee.



I don't think it did, but thanks for playing

NLUK has met his match!

[GB9]

Does it state the penalty for leaving before the end of the contract?

[LondonManc]

Depends on day rate. I'd want to factor in a percentage extra if I'm bound into it (i.e. at least 10%) to make up for a rate cut. While in principle it'd be great to just walk if you have a rate cut imposed on you, you may have committed to accommodation (early-bird offers, two month airbnb etc.) so it's not that practical. The no-notice period is for the client to mitigate the raft of future walks while people get their cvs out elsewhere and bugger off in phases. You go then or you stay at the lower rate. Very one-sided.

[northernladuk]

NLUK has met his match!

Because I make a suggestion as I thought the rule was different and I'm about the post the evidence which shows I was partially right in what I though, just the OP hasn't seen the one I have

Anyway. Thanks for that. Keep it up

[malvolio]

Zero notice is nothing to do with pseudo-employee rights. Zero notice implies no mutuality when applied asymmetrically, i.e. you are engaged to deliver X regardless while your client can bail if you are no longer needed. It's all about protecting their interests, nothing else.

As for the "not legally enforceable" bollocks, if you sign a contract with a given clause in it, then that clause is legally enforceable. If you don't want it to be, don't sign it or negotiate something different.

[northernladuk]

An employee cannot have a contract which says that they must stay for all eternity. They must have a notice period which they can give to leave the contract.

In this case, the contract says that the provider cannot leave until the end of the contract. Which could be used as an indicator that the contractor is not an employee.

Ah. Interesting. There is this article which is why I did suggest the other version..

IR35: Right of Dismissal
It is not normally the case that a self employed person could be dismissed other than if he was in breach of the terms of his contract. An employee would have the right to be given statutory notice of the termination of his employment. HMRC see notice periods as being indicative of employment however reasonable notice periods are considered defendable.
If a contractor is not able to terminate their contract early, or has a notice period in excess of one month, the contract will fall inside IR35.

Not having a termination clause would be best

Vessey recommends that wherever possible termination clauses should only be included to cover the most serious breaches, such as where a contractor makes a serious and costly error or is giving away trade secrets.

I don't think it did, but thanks for playing

You are welcome.

[missinggreenfields]

Depends on day rate. I'd want to factor in a percentage extra if I'm bound into it (i.e. at least 10%) to make up for a rate cut. While in principle it'd be great to just walk if you have a rate cut imposed on you, you may have committed to accommodation (early-bird offers, two month airbnb etc.) so it's not that practical. The no-notice period is for the client to mitigate the raft of future walks while people get their cvs out elsewhere and bugger off in phases. You go then or you stay at the lower rate. Very one-sided.

If the client is giving a rate cut, then they are terminating the existing contract and then offering a new contract which you are free to accept or decline.

There is no correlation between having a no-terminate clause and forcing a change of terms in the original contract.

[LondonManc]

If the client is giving a rate cut, then they are terminating the existing contract and then offering a new contract which you are free to accept or decline.

There is no correlation between having a no-terminate clause and forcing a change of terms in the original contract.

I know the technicalities, I've been through one at Barcap. The correlation is there; the no-notice period has been introduced, allegedly, to prevent what I said, i.e. contractors taking a month or two longer to line up exits. They get two weeks and then start a revised no-notice contract or get off site.