I've been saying for a long time that clients see no need to make changes to their contractor terms because of IR35 and here's a story that proves it:
Last week I started a new contract. I was interviewed to be placed on a specific new project that they had, which was currently in the design phase.
The rate was rubbish and the location was inconvenient (both to me and generally) but I was interested by the opportunity, so I said yes.
When I got there on Monday I was given some general documentation to read and the manager informed me that I would probably be allocated to an ongoing project that was in the "trial" stage. I said nothing, whilst I sounded out the situation with the junior staff.
Having chatted to them that it appeared that the promised project did not exist in any form (though they did have a working product which was similar) and they had no projects in the design phase.
Back on the job after a bit more reading, I was introduced to the senior engineer on the "trial" project and he told me that my immediate task was to write some test cases.
This is a task that I like to avoid at any reasonable cost, so I want to the manager for a chat. He was completely unapologetic about having inflated the opportunity at the interview and made it clear that he expected me to "do the task allocated and lump it". I made it clear that "this was not how I worked". He said that if I felt that way I should go, so I did.
So, if an employer in a remote location, where there isn't an obvious pool of available engineers, paying rubbish rates, can still manage to keep contractors on board when they over inflate the expectations of the work available, why should they bother about accommodating IR35 concerns?
PS if anyone want's an embedded engineer to do development work, I'm available (again)
tim
Last week I started a new contract. I was interviewed to be placed on a specific new project that they had, which was currently in the design phase.
The rate was rubbish and the location was inconvenient (both to me and generally) but I was interested by the opportunity, so I said yes.
When I got there on Monday I was given some general documentation to read and the manager informed me that I would probably be allocated to an ongoing project that was in the "trial" stage. I said nothing, whilst I sounded out the situation with the junior staff.
Having chatted to them that it appeared that the promised project did not exist in any form (though they did have a working product which was similar) and they had no projects in the design phase.
Back on the job after a bit more reading, I was introduced to the senior engineer on the "trial" project and he told me that my immediate task was to write some test cases.
This is a task that I like to avoid at any reasonable cost, so I want to the manager for a chat. He was completely unapologetic about having inflated the opportunity at the interview and made it clear that he expected me to "do the task allocated and lump it". I made it clear that "this was not how I worked". He said that if I felt that way I should go, so I did.
So, if an employer in a remote location, where there isn't an obvious pool of available engineers, paying rubbish rates, can still manage to keep contractors on board when they over inflate the expectations of the work available, why should they bother about accommodating IR35 concerns?
PS if anyone want's an embedded engineer to do development work, I'm available (again)
tim
Presume business must be bad at the mo, due to the bad economic news.
Comment