• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Screening process

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by TheGreenBastard View Post
    I'm guessing it's an inside gig if you're so naive and open about having other "clients", and justifying it with paying the mortgage. Why would a business expose itself like that, you moved to hourly and that's when your mouth should have shut. A great example of power imbalance to boot.
    The only justification I gave for going to hourly rather than weekly was that there was not enough work to justify billing weekly.

    The rest of the conversation occurred later when the CTO asked why I wasn’t available in the working day (he tried to phone me a few times, which is unusual) and I explained I had another client. They seemed surprised. I explained it was fully compliant with my contract. They still seemed surprised so I asked them how they imagined I was going to pay the mortgage otherwise and they didn’t reply.

    Not sure what this has to do with the question at hand though. If you want to flame me for being stupid then perhaps start a thread in general?
    "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

    https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

    Comment


      #22
      Personally I wouldn't mention the fact that you have another client (perfectly fine when running a true business), or that I need to somehow pay the mortgage (no one really cares / needs to know), but that's all done and dusted, so no point in focusing on it.

      What I don't get though is why the CTO had no idea you moved to hourly billing due to not enough work, who the hell agreed with you that it's OK to go to hourly? I'm guessing they were fully aware that hourly is due to not enough work and not "oh wow this chap will bill us less, but still be there 40hrs a week for support"? there seems to be a fair amount of dim people at that place...

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by dsc View Post
        Personally I wouldn't mention the fact that you have another client (perfectly fine when running a true business), or that I need to somehow pay the mortgage (no one really cares / needs to know), but that's all done and dusted, so no point in focusing on it.

        What I don't get though is why the CTO had no idea you moved to hourly billing due to not enough work, who the hell agreed with you that it's OK to go to hourly? I'm guessing they were fully aware that hourly is due to not enough work and not "oh wow this chap will bill us less, but still be there 40hrs a week for support"? there seems to be a fair amount of dim people at that place...
        Don't really get how it's meant to work. Ok you're now hourly, but which hours? Hours where there is work? Ok but who decides what is and isn't work?

        Surely you agreed roughly what hours you would be working and when? Otherwise then I can see why they would think you're effectively on call.

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by dsc View Post
          Personally I wouldn't mention the fact that you have another client (perfectly fine when running a true business), or that I need to somehow pay the mortgage (no one really cares / needs to know), but that's all done and dusted, so no point in focusing on it.

          What I don't get though is why the CTO had no idea you moved to hourly billing due to not enough work, who the hell agreed with you that it's OK to go to hourly? I'm guessing they were fully aware that hourly is due to not enough work and not "oh wow this chap will bill us less, but still be there 40hrs a week for support"? there seems to be a fair amount of dim people at that place...
          Well it's exposed the dynamic of the relationship, clearly they think they own him like a perm, even in light of agreeing to hourly - saying you have a mortgage to pay probably solidifies that impression. With that said about it clearly being deep inside IR35, I don't think there will be any screening process issues, often it's an external entity, I've never personally seen anything come of these types of situations.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by JustKeepSwimming View Post

            Don't really get how it's meant to work. Ok you're now hourly, but which hours? Hours where there is work? Ok but who decides what is and isn't work?

            Surely you agreed roughly what hours you would be working and when? Otherwise then I can see why they would think you're effectively on call.
            I reckon it would be the same as say a plasterer / plumber coming in to do a job, you give them a task, they do it, then tell you it took say 3hrs and bill accordingly. The issue is that you need someone to sign off the job to say it's been done to an acceptable standard. I feel like maybe that never happened hence they are now saying there's issues with previously delivered work.

            Personally I don't get why they assumed OP would be on call effectively for free. The first thing you typically think of with on-call people is that a) they are being paid all the time b) can we afford it with a contractor. Thinking you can get someone on-call for 20-30% of pay is a bit retarded if you ask me.

            Anyways, all guess, so it's a bit pointless...

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by dsc View Post

              I reckon it would be the same as say a plasterer / plumber coming in to do a job, you give them a task, they do it, then tell you it took say 3hrs and bill accordingly.
              You are not thinking like a contractor or a plasterer.

              You tell the client you need to pick up materials, return three hours later with egg yolk on your T-Shirt, do three hours work and bill for a day.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by dsc View Post

                I reckon it would be the same as say a plasterer / plumber coming in to do a job, you give them a task, they do it, then tell you it took say 3hrs and bill accordingly. The issue is that you need someone to sign off the job to say it's been done to an acceptable standard. I feel like maybe that never happened hence they are now saying there's issues with previously delivered work.

                Personally I don't get why they assumed OP would be on call effectively for free. The first thing you typically think of with on-call people is that a) they are being paid all the time b) can we afford it with a contractor. Thinking you can get someone on-call for 20-30% of pay is a bit retarded if you ask me.

                Anyways, all guess, so it's a bit pointless...
                This was my expectation. As in they give me a shout when there is work to do and say we need this written and I would give them an estimate, write it and then bill them. It seemed quite a standard workflow in my mind.
                "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

                https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

                Comment


                  #28
                  As an update to anyone interested - I had a call with them yesterday.

                  The are arguing the toss about research into some new technologies being on the invoice when they had not asked for it. I pointed them towards the conversation where they said they were happy to pay for me to do research but offered to remove those hours from the invoice as it was only 4 hours.

                  They complained that something I had written was not what they had asked for, I pointed out that it matched exactly the specs I had been sent but they insist those were marketing documents and were not intended to be used as a spec. They both claimed that the spec was verbally described (I do not recollect that but it is possible) and any communication issues were my fault. I offered to halve the charge for those hours as the work was done in good faith and most of it still applies imho. If they do not want to pay anything for it then I guess I will write off the hours and not give them access to the repo.

                  I also pointed out that when we changed from 40 hours a week to hour by hour billing we did not discuss it until later June and no contract was signed until July so for them to apply the new contract from the 1st of June was unexpected hence some of the confusion over the hours as I was not keeping detailed records in June overall this caused a difference of about £1500 which I wrote off.

                  Apparently, they have a lost their main client (pretty much their only regular source of revenue) which might be why they are panicking a little.

                  Overall the conversation was friendly and they want to keep me on for when they have work they need done.
                  "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

                  https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by MyUserName View Post
                    As an update to anyone interested - I had a call with them yesterday.

                    The are arguing the toss about research into some new technologies being on the invoice when they had not asked for it. I pointed them towards the conversation where they said they were happy to pay for me to do research but offered to remove those hours from the invoice as it was only 4 hours.

                    They complained that something I had written was not what they had asked for, I pointed out that it matched exactly the specs I had been sent but they insist those were marketing documents and were not intended to be used as a spec. They both claimed that the spec was verbally described (I do not recollect that but it is possible) and any communication issues were my fault. I offered to halve the charge for those hours as the work was done in good faith and most of it still applies imho. If they do not want to pay anything for it then I guess I will write off the hours and not give them access to the repo.

                    I also pointed out that when we changed from 40 hours a week to hour by hour billing we did not discuss it until later June and no contract was signed until July so for them to apply the new contract from the 1st of June was unexpected hence some of the confusion over the hours as I was not keeping detailed records in June overall this caused a difference of about £1500 which I wrote off.

                    Apparently, they have a lost their main client (pretty much their only regular source of revenue) which might be why they are panicking a little.

                    Overall the conversation was friendly and they want to keep me on for when they have work they need done.
                    If they are squabbling about 4 hours you need to get out now - they will be timing comfort breaks next.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by JustKeepSwimming View Post

                      Don't be lazy. You could google it in 2 seconds if you actually cared.

                      He wasn't lazy, he was stating an opinion, one that I share.

                      Please remember that this is a Professional forum.
                      "I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
                      - Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X