Clients wanting contractor then treat them like employees

[psychocandy]

As a contractor, i would not be interested with changes to my client's business -- just the running of my own business. This would include meetings about a project i am working on for the client.

I would not be interested if ClientCo have appointed Mr Bloggs as Some Director, nor if they have found some new market they want to sell to, nor if next years sales target are going to be tough (but are achievable if "we" all muck in)!!!

If i were hiring an electrician to re-wire my house, i wouldn't expect him to join me for christmas dinner with the family to watch the Queen's speech and discuss how it will affect us in the future!

But if you paid the electrician to sit in your house on Xmas day, you dont think he'd show up?

If client wants me to be aware of how his business is run and he sees some sort of benefit for him in me attending, then if I'm paid for being there then whats the problem? It might be a bit boring and uninteresting to me though.

[psychocandy]

The place I'm at had a new contractor turn up yesterday to cover for someone else who left, he was told that he had to do the induction course for two hours today and he threw a right strop about being an independent supplier, not an employee, and that he wasn't doing it. Email came out last night telling us that we'd have to wait a bit longer for the replacement as the company were now looking for a replacement for that replacement.

If he'd have thought to ask a couple of questions before throwing the strop he'd have realised that the induction he was getting was the one that everyone in the building for over 1 week gets, be they employees, clients, contractors or huge suppliers. I've got a small team of suppliers in now from a major software company doing some work for 2 weeks and they had to do the induction. No induction means that you have to be escorted everywhere in the building for safety reasons. Company's rules, either abide by them or go elsewhere.

I wonder if he feels happy that although he's on the bench that he stood up for his rights.

EXACTLY. Why kick up a fuss for no reason at all?

[SneakySimon]

Meeting

I'd be interested - there might be an opportunity to spot more work and get in there first!

Don't you mean:

I'd be interested - there might be an opportunity to spot more talent and get in there first!

I would go, 2 hrs paid to sit and do nothing. I had to do a 3 day session last week, cost the bank over £1500 to sit on my butt and hear about the company direction, with 1/2 a day covering the changes to the permie end of year process. Riveting stuff!! Just played on iPhone at back.

[BolshieBastard]

But if you paid the electrician to sit in your house on Xmas day, you dont think he'd show up?

If client wants me to be aware of how his business is run and he sees some sort of benefit for him in me attending, then if I'm paid for being there then whats the problem? It might be a bit boring and uninteresting to me though.

Dont be so naive. It's nothing of the sort. There's no 'opportunity to see how one could bid'for future work and there's no benefit to you 'knowing how his business' is run.

For a start, it's a multi national. There is no 'his' in this. It was purely an information overload for the permies and a 'chance to play bingo!' according to the email HR issued. If you and others would be happy to sit through that then argue there was no direction and control by the client, then good luck!

I managed to have a word with the IT Director. He said it wasnt a problem if I didnt attend as it was really just some TLC for the staff.

[swamp]

Seriously, if you can't wriggle out of it by fixing a production issue, say, then just turn up. These things are a PITA but you're getting paid so what's the problem? Are you really worried about IR35? If so it's a dead duck: there were 23 investigations last year, 11 the year before, and 25 the year before that. You have more chance of being hit by a bus.

[kingcook]

Are you really worried about IR35?

Worried.... NO.

Trying to protect myself from getting shafted big time (by HMRC) in the future...... YES.

[BolshieBastard]

Seriously, if you can't wriggle out of it by fixing a production issue, say, then just turn up. These things are a PITA but you're getting paid so what's the problem? Are you really worried about IR35? If so it's a dead duck: there were 23 investigations last year, 11 the year before, and 25 the year before that. You have more chance of being hit by a bus.

I discussed it with the IT Director. He had no issue with me not attending this session.

I guess everyone has a different attitude to IR35. Yes, there are very few investigation but that isnt the point is it? Why go to the trouble of having certain clauses in your contract, having the contract professionally reviewed (you do have it reviewed, dont you?) if you are then going to accept every direction and control issue \ attendance at permie roadshows?

The concept of IR35 avoidance isnt just contractual or thinking 'oh well, there were only 23 investigations last year so I can ignore certain employee like situations.' Other may want to do that but I dont.

I was able to resolve this issue very amicably with the IT Director which I thinked him for his understanding. Their HR Dept, well, that's another matter!