KPMG - Enforced Leave (2017-18 edition)

[oliverson]

God forbid they actually acted like a proper consultancy and improved the products and services they sell when the client doesn't want staff on site / working, as opposed to just another bodyshop...

With an average age of around 25. Seriously, the HO is like a youth club.

[barrydidit]

With an average age of around 25. Seriously, the HO is like a youth club.

Maybe that's an answer to the 'why on earth did they pass HBoS's audit' question then...

[SussexSeagull]

On a very general point I remember when Christmas used to be a couple of days off followed by a day of for New Year's Day then it became this performance where all offices and factories closed for two weeks. In my permie days used to love working between Christmas and New Year as there was invariably nothing to do and it gave me another week off in the Summer.

That said it is what it is and with train operators doing work over Christmas I would struggle to get to an office anyway.

Don't get me started on the whole of British industry packing up for Summer!

[MrMarkyMark]

God forbid they actually acted like a proper consultancy and improved the products and services they sell when the client doesn't want staff on site / working, as opposed to just another bodyshop...

[Zylon]

This is obviously unfortunate if you didn't want the time off, personally I also prefer to take breaks mainly in the summer. However, in my view it's quite reasonable and also has no bearing on IR35 either way.

If a construction site closed work over Christmas, then the supply subcontractors would hardly insist on continuing to deliver materials to the site - but this is no way suggests they're employees of the construction company.

I agree with the point that KPMG etc. should be able to provide other services, but exactly the same argument can go for the end contractor - otherwise they're arguably just an employee of KPMG. Ultimately it comes down to productivity of the contractor over that period. Some will be able to operate at full productivity, but others whose function is highly dependent on interacting with people throughout the day can obviously not be productive when most of the permies are off, so the client is quite entitled to seek efficiencies.

[northernladuk]

This is obviously unfortunate if you didn't want the time off, personally I also prefer to take breaks mainly in the summer. However, in my view it's quite reasonable and also has no bearing on IR35 either way.

If a construction site closed work over Christmas, then the supply subcontractors would hardly insist on continuing to deliver materials to the site - but this is no way suggests they're employees of the construction company.

I agree with the point that KPMG etc. should be able to provide other services, but exactly the same argument can go for the end contractor - otherwise they're arguably just an employee of KPMG. Ultimately it comes down to productivity of the contractor over that period. Some will be able to operate at full productivity, but others whose function is highly dependent on interacting with people throughout the day can obviously not be productive when most of the permies are off, so the client is quite entitled to seek efficiencies.

I'd agree. It's in your contract about getting paid for work done. The same when you take time off. Not an IR35 issue.

[MrMarkyMark]

This is obviously unfortunate if you didn't want the time off, personally I also prefer to take breaks mainly in the summer. However, in my view it's quite reasonable and also has no bearing on IR35 either way.

If a construction site closed work over Christmas, then the supply subcontractors would hardly insist on continuing to deliver materials to the site - but this is no way suggests they're employees of the construction company.

I agree with the point that KPMG etc. should be able to provide other services, but exactly the same argument can go for the end contractor - otherwise they're arguably just an employee of KPMG. Ultimately it comes down to productivity of the contractor over that period. Some will be able to operate at full productivity, but others whose function is highly dependent on interacting with people throughout the day can obviously not be productive when most of the permies are off, so the client is quite entitled to seek efficiencies.

This.

It would only be beneficial in the terms of an IR35 defence pointer if all permies were working usual hours and the contractors were to have an enforced furlough.

In fact it saved someone I knows bacon from further investigation, who quite honestly I had joked about being well inside prior.

[kaiser78]

It's not really a problem though, is it?

My current client always furloughs a fortnight over xmas and I enjoy having the break (though have in the past been given exemptions due to project targets so ended up taking ~1 week instead).

I get that having something "forced" as a contractor might be frustrating, but it's not like having time off work to spend with your friends/family/plan B project is a bad thing

One size does not fit all unfortunately, as I am finding out this year even more unfortunately !

[pr1]

In fact it saved someone I knows bacon from further investigation, who quite honestly I had joked about being well inside prior.

This is what gets tiring about everyone saying everyone else is inside IR35 on this forum - D&C is only one of the three pillars, legally speaking if you can prove one of the other two (lack of MoO or substitution), it doesn't matter how much D&C you're under - which is why QDOS can offer to cover you for tens of thousands of pounds of potential tax/NI owed for a few hundred quid a year - they know how to win in court

[LondonManc]

This is what gets tiring about everyone saying everyone else is inside IR35 on this forum - D&C is only one of the three pillars, legally speaking if you can prove one of the other two (lack of MoO or substitution), it doesn't matter how much D&C you're under - which is why QDOS can offer to cover you for tens of thousands of pounds of potential tax/NI owed for a few hundred quid a year - they know how to win in court

Absolutely correct. It's when it becomes all three that you have to prove that you're going to come unstuck. If you're a specialist of any sort you're generally fine. If you're able to send someone in and prove it's not a sham clause, you're fine. That's why I think in IT that more junior contractors are at risk - particularly PMO team and generic younger BAs with no SME knowledge.