"Could you take a quick look at this?" aka DAC during contracts

[Devinity]

Am wondering how most IT contractors here deal with clients who like to think that they are hiring temporary employee devs who they can get to jump onto different projects as they see fit.

So far, it's been my opinion that from a DAC point of view, for a fixed-length of time contract it's best if I can at least agree up front the project that I will be assigned so that this can go into the assignment schedule, rather than have a more generic "Supplier of development services." or something similar, which seems to me to demonstrate DAC. Do you think it really does make a difference?

That said, even with that in place it's all too easy for someone to pop by your desk when you're there to say that they're in a bind as someone is off sick and could you assist with a particular issue that afternoon / next 2 days. "Could" is not often really a question

What is the best approach to this? Do you:

- Politely point out that you're contracted to just work on project X and you can't assist
- Politely point out that you're not meant to but after some hand-wringing, do the work anyway
- Help out without raising an issue

If it's not the first, doesn't this display a distinct lack of DAC? Have you managed the first and still maintained a good relationship with the client and not been seen as a problematic worker, given that the other contractors who don't give two stuffs about IR35 will likely just do it without thinking.

Or, am I just simply overthinking things? Can you agree to more generic dev contracts that would still stand good from an IR35 view? I imagine some clients could get testy even about having a specific assignment schedule, and would you treat this as a dealbreaker?

[MrMarkyMark]

Am wondering how most IT contractors here deal with clients who like to think that they are hiring temporary employee devs who they can get to jump onto different projects as they see fit.

So far, it's been my opinion that from a DAC point of view, for a fixed-length of time contract it's best if I can at least agree up front the project that I will be assigned so that this can go into the assignment schedule, rather than have a more generic "Supplier of development services." or something similar, which seems to me to demonstrate DAC. Do you think it really does make a difference?

That said, even with that in place it's all too easy for someone to pop by your desk when you're there to say that they're in a bind as someone is off sick and could you assist with a particular issue that afternoon / next 2 days. "Could" is not often really a question

What is the best approach to this? Do you:

- Politely point out that you're contracted to just work on project X and you can't assist
- Politely point out that you're not meant to but after some hand-wringing, do the work anyway
- Help out without raising an issue

If it's not the first, doesn't this display a distinct lack of DAC? Have you managed the first and still maintained a good relationship with the client and not been seen as a problematic worker, given that the other contractors who don't give two stuffs about IR35 will likely just do it without thinking.

Or, am I just simply overthinking things? Can you agree to more generic dev contracts that would still stand good from an IR35 view? I imagine some clients could get testy even about having a specific assignment schedule, and would you treat this as a dealbreaker?

How about, you are being paid for project X out of projects X's budget, so its not something that you should take on ad-hoc, even though you would love to help .

[northernladyuk]

Give them a quotation for a one off piece of work. It's a bit more awkward if there is an agency involved, so in that case I offer to quote via the agency.

[MrMarkyMark]

You could also argue that your PI insurance does not cover you for working on systems not defined in a / the schedule.

[northernladyuk]

You could also argue that your PI insurance does not cover you for working on systems not defined in a / the schedule.

Or subcontract it to PC. He'll do anything.

[vwdan]

You could also argue that your PI insurance does not cover you for working on systems not defined in a / the schedule.

Is this really true though? I hear so much BS on here about "my insurance won't cover this and won't cover that". If you want to use it as an excuse that's fine, but Id be shocked if there's a clause that would mean you're not covered.

[MrMarkyMark]

Is this really true though? I hear so much BS on here about "my insurance won't cover this and won't cover that". If you want to use it as an excuse that's fine, but Id be shocked if there's a clause that would mean you're not covered.

No.

But they don't know that

[radish2008]

Is this really true though? I hear so much BS on here about "my insurance won't cover this and won't cover that". If you want to use it as an excuse that's fine, but Id be shocked if there's a clause that would mean you're not covered.

Yeah - I tend to agree.

I've never worked a contract where I've done one single project, or haven't been asked at some point to 'quickly fix this' To be frank, on some level almost every contract falls into Control as the contract needs to state what is actually needed, and someone always test what you have done so everyone to a certain extent is Supervised.

Supervision is someone overseeing a person doing work, to ensure that person is doing the work they are required to do and it is being done correctly to the required standard. Supervision can also involve helping the person where appropriate in order to develop their skills and knowledge.

Direction is someone making a person do is/her work in a certain way by providing them with instructions, guidance or advice as to how the work must be done. Someone providing direction will often coordinate the how the work is done, as it is being undertaken.

Control is someone dictating what work a person does and how they go about doing that work. Control also includes someone having the power to move the person from one job to another.

Of course the real test of all of this comes in court.

[vwdan]

No.

But they don't know that

Oh, that's fair then! Agreed in that case - easy way out.

[LondonManc]

You may class it as DAC while a true business classes it as a sales opportunity; ergo, you're inside.