Work in Banking? Don't worry about the blanket ban you were probably inside all along

[northernladuk]

Agreed, just curious. I'd assume it's the difference between "PM for Project X" and "PM for Project X where A, B and C are the deliverables by ZZ".

But if that doesn't reflect the working practices and culture it wouldn't stand up.

[LondonManc]

MoO appears okay from what the judge said - it only existed in the contract and its deliverables.

What appears to be the problem is that he was seen as part and parcel, not enough SDC, no RoS and very much could have had his role filled by a perm given his length of stay. I'd say that specialists dropped into a project, completing it and buggering off, even within banking, will be okay from that point of view; virtually no SDC, not seen as part and parcel, RoS is moot to an extent if it's short term and too focused to take on anything else.

[eek]

MoO appears okay from what the judge said - it only existed in the contract and its deliverables.

What appears to be the problem is that he was seen as part and parcel, not enough SDC, no RoS and very much could have had his role filled by a perm given his length of stay. I'd say that specialists dropped into a project, completing it and buggering off, even within banking, will be okay from that point of view; virtually no SDC, not seen as part and parcel, RoS is moot to an extent if it's short term and too focused to take on anything else.

Don't you mean too much SDC - Mr Lee had in practicea considerable degree of operational and personal autonomy but was subject to overarchingcontrols primarily concerned with Nationwide’s need as a highly regulated business tomonitor the progress of the relevant project consistent with Mr Lee being a highly skilledemployee.

And I can't see how you escape that in a bank...

[BrilloPad]

Was Mr Lee being backed by QDOS or IPSE? I wonder what they make of this?

[eek]

Was Mr Lee being backed by QDOS or IPSE? I wonder what they make of this?

Neither are going to be publishing press releases announcing their complete defeat are they?

[northernladuk]

Neither are going to be publishing press releases announcing their complete defeat are they?

Indeed. But looking at the facts here you couldn't blame them for not taking this on under their reasonable chance of win clause.

It also means other PMs at Nationwide and maybe other banks may find the insurance they have thinking it's keeping then safe suddenly isn't worth the paper it's not written on.

There could be a lot of fall out from this beyond the guy losing.

[GhostofTarbera]

Thank god ive never been a PM in a bank for extended periods !!!

Gets bag of popcorn to wait for knock at the door


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[Tertius]

"part and parcel of the organisation and other provisions of the contract
139. HMRC argued that for all intents and purposes Mr Lee was part of the projects team at
Nationwide some of whom were employees who did a similar role to Mr Lee. He reported to
a Nationwide manager and Nationwide believed his role to be akin to employment.
140. The fact that Mr Lee was not entitled to employee style benefits such as holiday, sick
pay or pension entitlement simply followed from the nature of the contract the parties have
chosen and should not be used as an indicator.
141. Any statement within the actual contracts between the worker, intermediary and client
as to whether the parties intended their relationship to be one of the employment will be
given minimal, if any, weight in construing the hypothetical contract between the worker and
the client (Dragonfly Consulting Limited [2008] STC 3030 at [54] to [55].
142. The appellant’s argument that Mr Lee was not prevented from working elsewhere, but
the reality was that working a 37 to 40 hour week meant there was no scope for doing so."

Not sure how they define 'reporting to a Nationwide manager' but the next bit that 'Nationwide believed his role to be akin to employment.' would be damning and might be the first question they would have asked Nationwide.
The lack of understanding by client employees about how the relationship should be conducted is at the heart of all of these issues.
The Clients want employees without paying for them, and they get you in on self employed contracts, try to exert control during the contract and if HMRC comes knocking they sell you down the river.

[LondonManc]

Don't you mean too much SDC - Mr Lee had in practicea considerable degree of operational and personal autonomy but was subject to overarchingcontrols primarily concerned with Nationwide’s need as a highly regulated business tomonitor the progress of the relevant project consistent with Mr Lee being a highly skilledemployee.

And I can't see how you escape that in a bank...

Yes or no, no (double negatives aren't great, no?)

Depends on the project whether it should be subject to tight controls but, yes, most are.

A project to deliver an analytics dashboard to marketing, for example, wouldn't need to be subject to much scrutiny.

[perplexed]

But if that doesn't reflect the working practices and culture it wouldn't stand up.

Absolutely agree, but I've certainly seen agents sending over contracts with generalisations rather than specifics, which isn't encouraging from the start.