I was wondering if anyone had a contract with Huntress and whether it was outside IR35?
-
-
I'd like to have contact with a huntress
-
It's not just the contract that places you outside IR35 it's working practices as well - you can have an Outside IR35 contract, but if your working is under supervision, and you haven't got any real Sub then you're stuffed.Originally posted by jo99 View Post
Thats why the majority of support [ help desk ] roles are insde IR35 no matter what the agency/contract says...Cenedl heb iaith, cenedl heb galon
Comment
-
I am aware of the working practices bit... I wanted to know if the contract was 'decent', with no weird clauses....Comment
-
You really need to understand D&C. If you have to be at your desk at a given time because otherwise you can't do the job, that's not D&C. If you have to follow company procedures and processes becuase that's how the job is done, that's not D&C.Originally posted by Bluebird View Post
If you have to get time-off approved, as opposed to doing it by negotiation, that's D&C. If your contract requires you to do something that is not demanded by the job itself and you can't refuse and simply go home without pay, then that's D&C (and probably MOO as well, come to think of it). If you can be told to go and do a different job altogether, that's D&C.
But if you actually sign a contract with those demands in them, then you have just wasted 20% of your income. Contract and working practices have to agree with each other, but the client is as much bound by them as you are (on the optimistic assumption the agency/client contract matched the YourCo/agency one of course). You can't be required to do anything that is not in the contract you signed.
So get the contract right and even the humblest helpdesk job can be taken out of IR35.Blog? What blog...?
Comment
-
Didn't some wise person comment recently that all IR35 cases that have gone to court have centred on the contractual terms, not on the "working practices".Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!Comment
-
I think that the last case lost (by PCG representatives) centred around the working practices.Originally posted by NotAllThere View PostComment
-
Not quite. The upper and lower contracts did not agree with each other on the key areas of RoS and D&C, plus the client's representative, when giving his evidence, gave a completely different spin both to the original agreement and the reality of the situation. Accountax wound up in an indefensible position.Originally posted by Gonzo View Post
The key point is the mismatch of contracts: had the guy been up for a fight we would have taken it on and sued the agency for misrepresentation
but he had had enough grief already (as well as losing a few £10ks in back tax)Blog? What blog...?Comment
-
Mal,Originally posted by malvolio View Post
you'll enjoy this on MoO:
http://www.contractoruk.com/news/003443.htmlComment
-
Thud...thud...thud....
Now you can see why the PCG are trying to get some sort of educational dialogue going with the agencies.
Incidentally just went for a local role via dear old CP. Fixed-term contract as an employee, so a non-starter AFAIC unless I could run it as a proper one year contract, but I was astonished how little the CP girlie knew about the way the freelance market works. I know she's in permie recruitment, but absolutely not the slightest understanding of MyCo and how I can actually pay myself and all the taxes from a gross invoice amount. And no idea about the overhears of a permi to work out an equal day rate from an annual salary
Of course, she's probably also advising the client, which is why they now have a gap in their organsiation...Blog? What blog...?Comment
Comment