IR35 again

[eek]

Fool. HMRC have powers.

What powers? Link to documentary proof please as otherwise I will trust what I witnessed first hand...

[BlasterBates]

At the end of the day it depends on what the PM tells an Inspector. If a PM says "yes he always has to get approval first before taking a holiday" you're buggered and it doesn't matter whether you fill out a form.

This is the problem, whether you're inside IR35 is not really in your hands, it's in the hands of the client.

It's the same with substitution, might be in the contract, and without it most reviews seem to fail, but how realistic is it.

[suityou01]

WBBS

[original PM]

jeez all this fuss about a first line helpdesk job..

anyone would think he was important

[SpontaneousOrder]

• Communicate the dates that I was unavailable to the client
• Offer to provide an alternative individual to work those days
• Out of politeness, ensure that the system was updated to record that I would not be present

I've got no issue with that in general. But if the guys there from consultancies don't have to do it, then I wouldn't want to really.
That does leave the question of what do the consultancies communicate to the client, though, when their permies want holiday?

I'm working on the assumption that surely these holiday booking systems can be completed by someone other than the person taking the holiday. I.e. i tell client manager, and he can fill out the system if he likes (which i think is what mine currently does) - leaving his name next to the timestamp. Not mine.

[eek]

jeez all this fuss about a first line helpdesk job..

anyone would think he was important

The problem is that he isn't....... Others on this thread post in the knowledge that we know (or at least hope/ believe) that we were good enough that previous clients will want us back....

Suity knows / fears that he is so bad no-one who has previously dealt with him will want him to return.


I exempt the German's here as clearly they either

• know no better
• enjoyed last year's entertainment they are willing to pay for more

[suityou01]

I've got no issue with that in general. But if the guys there from consultancies don't have to do it, then I wouldn't want to really.
That does leave the question of what do the consultancies communicate to the client, though, when their permies want holiday?

I'm working on the assumption that surely these holiday booking systems can be completed by someone other than the person taking the holiday. I.e. i tell client manager, and he can fill out the system if he likes (which i think is what mine currently does) - leaving his name next to the timestamp. Not mine.

Precisely. They were more than capable of completing the form for and on behalf of but refused.

[eek]

Precisely. They were more than capable of completing the form for and on behalf of but refused.

To which I repeat my question of earlier.

So it went

Client: fill in this form
Suity: no
Client: here is the door

Somehow I think there is slightly more to it than that.

Was this the straw that broke the client's back?

[TheFaQQer]

Precisely. They were more than capable of completing the form for and on behalf of but refused.

The difference seems to be that when they refused, the client said "OK, we'll work round that", but when you refused they terminated the contract.

If the agency contract ended because of a breach in contract terms, and you are a PCG+ member, then you can claim up to £1000 on their insurance, which is why I asked a couple of times whether that would apply to you.

[suityou01]

The problem is that he isn't....... Others on this thread post in the knowledge that we know (or at least hope/ believe) that we were good enough that previous clients will want us back....

Suity knows / fears that he is so bad no-one who has previously dealt with him will want him to return.


I exempt the German's here as clearly they either

• know no better
• enjoyed last year's entertainment they are willing to pay for more

Time to quit it pal. You're a braying buffoon.