So...anybody ask for any of this?

[tractor]

...

Perhaps the full details haven't been decided yet of course...

Just a thought.

Outside the box, the point being made is that there is a suspicion that they actually have been decided independently.

You may just not know it yet.

[TheFaQQer]

If it is genuinely of value to contractors then putting full info and details on here would surely be a way to drive membership to PCG/IPSE.

New contractors excepted, the majority of posters on CUK who aren't IPSE members are unlikely to be swayed by them putting the details here - they may well be happy to freeload off the hard work of others get the benefits that IPSE creates for all self-employed people, whether you asked for it or not. I'm not suggesting that everyone thinks this way, and the more people that are actively engaged in IPSE the better - even if only to try to put some kind of brake on policy that you don't agree with, or just to get your voice heard.

If you want input into the debate, though, IPSE expect you to be a member for your concerns to be acknowledged by them - as has been said, for £150 you have the chance to give your input directly to IPSE. The discussion about FLC on the IPSE forums gives some insight into the thought processes of those that have chosen to participate - including CC and board members - which you will not get over here.

I am more than happy to discuss the proposals here and there, because I believe that it's something that will have an impact on the majority of us. I firmly believe that IPSE should be engaging with those outside the organisation in places like this, though, since their suggestions to government might have negative impacts on those of us who operate via a limited company.

[eek]

Perhaps the full details haven't been decided yet of course...

Just a thought.

The manifesto has been published. Surely you had full details to go alongside the manifesto when it was published as the detail really shouldn't contradict the summaries...

[tractor]

...

New contractors excepted, the majority of posters on CUK who aren't IPSE members are unlikely to be swayed by them putting the details here - they may well be happy to freeload off the hard work of others get the benefits that IPSE creates for all self-employed people, whether you asked for it or not. I'm not suggesting that everyone thinks this way, and the more people that are actively engaged in IPSE the better - even if only to try to put some kind of brake on policy that you don't agree with, or just to get your voice heard.

If you want input into the debate, though, IPSE expect you to be a member for your concerns to be acknowledged by them - as has been said, for £150 you have the chance to give your input directly to IPSE. The discussion about FLC on the IPSE forums gives some insight into the thought processes of those that have chosen to participate - including CC and board members - which you will not get over here.

I am more than happy to discuss the proposals here and there, because I believe that it's something that will have an impact on the majority of us. I firmly believe that IPSE should be engaging with those outside the organisation in places like this, though, since their suggestions to government might have negative impacts on those of us who operate via a limited company.

Equally, I am trying to do the same.

With mixed results as you can imagine. But seriously, for the protection you get regardless and the opportunity to make yourself heard, you need to be a member. It is not enough for just a few of us to carry your concerns over there in amongst our own.

[malvolio]

Edit

Which is why I was polite enough to PM my concerns to Malvolio when I first heard about them. But as always you thought you had the complete picture....

No, as I recall we had a brief exchange about scope creep in the context of what appeared to be the new rules around onshore and offshore umbrellas and what different people meant by the word "agency". If you were trying to say that it might also apply to a legal construct that doesn't yet exist, you will forgive me for not seeing the relevance. Had I done it would have been passed along the food chain, although without any supporting evidence it probably wouldn't have been taken that seriously.

[TykeMerc]

Perhaps the full details haven't been decided yet of course...

Just a thought.

The arrogance involved in your organisation believing they have a mandate to decide that is staggering.....

[TykeMerc]

Equally, I am trying to do the same.

With mixed results as you can imagine. But seriously, for the protection you get regardless and the opportunity to make yourself heard, you need to be a member. It is not enough for just a few of us to carry your concerns over there in amongst our own.

It's not the cost (with the insurance package included that's irrelevant) it's the fact that by joining they can immediately claim my mandate that concerns me more than a little.
Plus it's clear from the IPSE posts on here that any debate is just noise that will be ignored.

[eek]

get the benefits that IPSE creates for all self-employed people, whether you asked for it or not.

No because as I have continually argued the biggest group IPSE claimed to want to target with the name change would really be better off with support from GMB or some other union with experience in such things.

Now personally I don't have to worry about getting my viewpoint heard at the top of the current government... Next year may be a different matter but for the moment there are a few old acquaintances happy to spend their lunch hour with me if I'm in the area...

[tractor]

...

It's not the cost (with the insurance package included that's irrelevant) it's the fact that by joining they can immediately claim my mandate that concerns me more than a little.
Plus it's clear from the IPSE posts on here that any debate is just noise that will be ignored.

I take your point but at the current membership level I think it takes only 444 voices in alignment to make an impact.

[TheFaQQer]

It's not the cost (with the insurance package included that's irrelevant) it's the fact that by joining they can immediately claim my mandate that concerns me more than a little.

They are already claiming your mandate - if you join up, you at least get to contribute to the mandate that they are already claiming