Difficult start to contract

[LondonManc]

This is terrible, terrible advice.

I worked for a consultancy firm as a permie for a few years and several times before I could attend site to carry out long-ish term projects, the client would have to run through an onboarding process to get me a temporary pass / allow me access to the servers etc. Even if my employer had written and said "our consultant is trustworthy" it wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference and they'd have lost the business to another company.

There was one engagement I did for 4 weeks solid where I had to meet HR to talk about stupid things like the evacuation process!!!

Correct. Billy's always struggled with the compliance and operational risk side of being onboarded as a contingent worker into a large organization that's risk averse.

[billybiro]

Correct. Billy's always struggled with the compliance and operational risk side of being onboarded as a contingent worker into a large organization that's risk averse.

Contingent worker? Are you really sure want to use that phrase?

From Wikipedia:
"Contingent work or casual work is an employment relationship which is considered non-permanent."

And we wonder why, with every passing year, HMRC and the Gov want to treat us more and more like employees.

As for "compliance and operational risk", that is mitigated with the client, not by submissively agreeing to a personal background check like some pseudo-employee, but by simply showing them your professional indemnity insurance.

[billybiro]

You draw the line at what you feel is due diligence; that said, in some cases, I think it's more the background checkers trying to justify their checking rates. Especially when you're returning to the same client within a year or so. References for contracts since and proof that you're still insured, running as a limited co, etc. should suffice rather than having to jump through the same 72 hoops as last time.

Exactly.

This is fine. This is checks against your Ltd. and is perfectly fine due diligence for the client to perform. Demanding that you, personally, submit to a personal background check is way out of line. It's like the contractor demanding to personally credit check the FD to ensure that the client company is solvent.

[MrMarkyMark]

Contingent worker? Are you really sure want to use that phrase?

From Wikipedia:
"Contingent work or casual work is an employment relationship which is considered non-permanent."

And we wonder why, with every passing year, HMRC and the Gov want to treat us more and more like employees.

As for "compliance and operational risk", that is mitigated with the client, not by submissively agreeing to a personal background check like some pseudo-employee, but by simply showing them your professional indemnity insurance.

Semantics do not really matter, truth be told the contingent tag probably came into common use due to a SAP HR module or some such.

Even if you go direct for some of these banks they have outsourced their in house HR to an agency, the bank actually contribute and sign off on the level of checking.

You often go on about plumbers and photo copier fixers. Different risks and associated insurances attached to those individuals.

I mean when did the photocopier man have access to live systems and media, unless you include the photocopier and filling up the paper tray in that definition

You clearly never work in the environments that we have for many years, as you wouldn't get in the door, or if you did you wouldn't be staying long.

[BrilloPad]

Semantics do not really matter, truth be told the contingent tag probably came into common use due to a SAP HR module or some such.

Even if you go direct for some of these banks they have outsourced their in house HR to an agency, the bank actually contribute and sign off on the level of checking.

You often go on about plumbers and photo copier fixers. Different risks and associated insurances attached to those individuals.

I mean when did the photocopier man have access to live systems and media, unless you include the photocopier and filling up the paper tray in that definition

You clearly never work in the environments that we have for many years, as you wouldn't get in the door, or if you did you wouldn't be staying long.

Very true.

The FCA has really cracked down on the financial institutions. There are just as many scandals(the morality is unchanged). However to make it look as if they are cracking downthey increase the paperwork and red-tape.

I often wonder how banks make any money. Then I realize they have a monopoly position and its like a printing press.

[northernladuk]

Contingent worker? Are you really sure want to use that phrase?

From Wikipedia:
"Contingent work or casual work is an employment relationship which is considered non-permanent."

.

https://www.contractorcalculator.co....2910_news.aspx

A contractor is a highly skilled contingent worker who delivers knowledge based services to their clients on a project by project basis. The key aspects of contractors are

[MrMarkyMark]

https://www.contractorcalculator.co....2910_news.aspx

"Casual" being quite a key term from BBs Wikipedia quote

[billybiro]

Semantics do not really matter, truth be told the contingent tag probably came into common use due to a SAP HR module or some such.

Even if you go direct for some of these banks they have outsourced their in house HR to an agency, the bank actually contribute and sign off on the level of checking.

You often go on about plumbers and photo copier fixers. Different risks and associated insurances attached to those individuals.

I mean when did the photocopier man have access to live systems and media, unless you include the photocopier and filling up the paper tray in that definition

You clearly never work in the environments that we have for many years, as you wouldn't get in the door, or if you did you wouldn't be staying long.

True, I've never worked in those environments as a contractor, nor would I. I have as a permie in a previous life, though.

"when did the photocopier man have access to live systems and media"

And when did developers/BA's/PM's working in a financial institution have access to live accounts worth millions/billions? We all know that internal IT is often laughable inside these institutions, but unless your statement of work for your contract states that your deliverable is to move tons of money from one place to another, you shouldn't be able to go anywhere near anything that could allow you to cause severe damage - or worse. There's good reasons we have development, testing and staging environments loaded with realistic but entirely dummy data etc. and even when I worked in these places as a permie, most of the clients had some amount of these safeguards in place (and the ones that didn't aren't with us any longer due to thinking that having someone fill in a form could prevent a malevolent person from committing all sorts of larceny - Go figure).

The point is, I know full well that these clients will insist you fill in these silly forms in the name of "compliance" and "risk mitigation", but they don't mean a thing. Moreover, as a contractor who wishes to distance themselves from permanent employees as much as possible, we should be actively fighting against such nonsense. We are Limiteds. We have professional indemnity insurance. That's the risk mitigation right there.

[northernladuk]

The point is, I know full well that these clients will insist you fill in these silly forms in the name of "compliance" and "risk mitigation", but they don't mean a thing. Moreover, as a contractor who wishes to distance themselves from permanent employees as much as possible, we should be actively fighting against such nonsense. We are Limiteds. We have professional indemnity insurance. That's the risk mitigation right there.

But many of these forms at to prove the client is meeting their legal obligations. Your PI doesn't help them do that.

[MrMarkyMark]

True, I've never worked in those environments as a contractor, nor would I. I have as a permie in a previous life, though.

"when did the photocopier man have access to live systems and media"

And when did developers/BA's/PM's working in a financial institution have access to live accounts worth millions/billions? We all know that internal IT is often laughable inside these institutions, but unless your statement of work for your contract states that your deliverable is to move tons of money from one place to another, you shouldn't be able to go anywhere near anything that could allow you to cause severe damage - or worse. There's good reasons we have development, testing and staging environments loaded with realistic but entirely dummy data etc. and even when I worked in these places as a permie, most of the clients had some amount of these safeguards in place (and the ones that didn't aren't with us any longer due to thinking that having someone fill in a form could prevent a malevolent person from committing all sorts of larceny - Go figure).

The point is, I know full well that these clients will insist you fill in these silly forms in the name of "compliance" and "risk mitigation", but they don't mean a thing. Moreover, as a contractor who wishes to distance themselves from permanent employees as much as possible, we should be actively fighting against such nonsense. We are Limiteds. We have professional indemnity insurance. That's the risk mitigation right there.

Seem to have plenty to say, but then say you would never work in such environments anyway.

So all done and dusted I guess.