So I think its finally dawned on IPSE's management

[eek]

Who's "we" in this context? And where do you think we (contractors) need to be and how are we going to get there? I thought your plan was to quit contracting?

Yep because I suspect the battle is lost. However there is zero difference between a one man band and a contractor so I'm still interested in case I can't expand easily and rapidly enough.

But lets go back a bit and see what HMRC want and what we will sleep walk into unless we find a way around it.

Come April 2019 - unless we do something the default position will be this contract is inside IR35 take it or leave it.

So we need to work out how to make that position absolutely unpalatable for everyone involved - to the point that the decision for all companies and agencies in April 2019 is:-

1. This role is inside IR35 (and we understand we need to give employee benefits) or
2. this role is outside and we will fight HMRC alongside you and the agency to proof it is outside.

Now the thing is I posted a variation of the above yesterday on IPSE's forums and everyone has ignored it. So I'm really not holding out much hope which is why I'm pining my hope on the unions thanks to the UBER ruling solving the first part of this. And the agencies doing the second bit once they realise how much they lose if the first part (everyone claiming employee rights after 12 weeks) is the default option.

Oh and the we in this context, bobspud myself and anyone else who can see the bigger picture. And those on here who saw the writing on the wall and have gone Permie including Suity...

[youngguy]

I think that is because they are in total shock and can't comprehend whats happened.

But I actually think the problem is really far simpler:

IPSE seem to think that because we are freelance we are somehow special, that means they create things like the FLC to solve a perceived problem the way they want to and then as those with a broader viewpoint ask how will you stop it being abused, claim that it won't be.

Of course ipse needs us to be this special group. They need that in order to justify their existence.

I have minute sympathy for their failure to lobby...what I dont accept is their new plan which appears to be the same as the last 5 months.

The message should now be "Gov we told you this was a bad idea and you didn't listen. You will take action and implement , this is the action we will take with members (employee rights ) and its gonna cost you a whole lot"

Lobbying did not work during consultation and it certainly won't work post a public announcement at the AS.

And to be honest, if this is deemed fair in the public sector, it is only fair it roll out everywhere as there is no difference between a ps contractor and private contractor (that will be the argument in 2 yrs)

[jonnyboy]

I have started the ball rolling in my own situation this morning (I like being proactive). So I have this morning....

1) Emailed my accountant and asked him to work out figures I would need to uplift my day rate by. I have him some indicative numbers from the on line IR35 tools, but I think they are based on tax via a mix of paye and dividends, and via IR£5, when taxed by the agent, its all PAYE
2) Sent the same email to my current agent, asking;
i. Whats their stance going forward - are they staying in the PS?
ii. Will they take a letter from the client of no SCD and being outside IR£5?
iii. If not, work out a new day rate for me based on their understanding of the rules (just so I can compare it with my accountants response)
3) I have set up a meeting on Monday for myself, my client head or PR and Finance, plus 2 other contractors (there are 30+ contractors here, keeping the 2 I work with in the loop on all of this) to talk about IR35, their stance on full employment rights, project based work, and their relationship with the agency
4) Have just refreshed my CV ready to start Private work searches from Monday
5) Put plan B into action (thats what I am working on today) - which I think is very much in line with eeks - but I may be wrong

[teapot418]

Yep because I suspect the battle is lost. However there is zero difference between a one man band and a contractor so I'm still interested in case I can't expand easily and rapidly enough.

But lets go back a bit and see what HMRC want and what we will sleep walk into unless we find a way around it.

Come April 2019 - unless we do something the default position will be this contract is inside IR35 take it or leave it.

So we need to work out how to make that position absolutely unpalatable for everyone involved - to the point that the decision for all companies and agencies in April 2019 is:-

1. This role is inside IR35 (and we understand we need to give employee benefits) or
2. this role is outside and we will fight HMRC alongside you and the agency to proof it is outside.

Now the thing is I posted a variation of the above yesterday on IPSE's forums and everyone has ignored it. So I'm really not holding out much hope which is why I'm pining my hope on the unions thanks to the UBER ruling solving the first part of this. And the agencies doing the second bit once they realise how much they lose if the first part (everyone claiming employee rights after 12 weeks) is the default option.

Oh and the we in this context, bobspud myself and anyone else who can see the bigger picture. And those on here who saw the writing on the wall and have gone Permie including Suity...

Thanks.

[eek]

Of course ipse needs us to be this special group. They need that in order to justify their existence.

I have minute sympathy for their failure to lobby...what I dont accept is their new plan which appears to be the same as the last 5 months.

The message should now be "Gov we told you this was a bad idea and you didn't listen. You will take action and implement , this is the action we will take with members (employee rights ) and its gonna cost you a whole lot"

Lobbying did not work during consultation and it certainly won't work post a public announcement at the AS.

And to be honest, if this is deemed fair in the public sector, it is only fair it roll out everywhere as there is no difference between a ps contractor and private contractor (that will be the argument in 2 yrs)

They didn't fail to lobby, their lobbying failed.

And its very easy to demonstrate why their approach failed. IPSE is Ian Paisley in Never, never, never mode

My approach would be (and was in the past) very much Ian Paisley in conversation with Sinn Fein trying to find a solution.

Granted neither option was going to work this time around - as I've said before this is a carefully crafted scheme man years in the planning. It's so well crafted however by people focussed on one area (get more tax) that they've missed the other side of things and chinks (agency rules, Uber) are appearing there. And that is the battle we need to win.

[youngguy]

They didn't fail to lobby, their lobbying failed..

Correct, I wrote it the wrong way round.

As you say. Recognise you tried that approach and failed , now use a different one. Saying 'we talk to No 10' means sod if if they don't listen

[malvolio]

Correct, I wrote it the wrong way round.

As you say. Recognise you tried that approach and failed , now use a different one. Saying 'we talk to No 10' means sod if if they don't listen

So you're finally catching up then.

But let's be clear, nobody can fix this mess now by talking and negotiation, it needs hard facts to demonstrate why it isn't working. And fighting for employment rights is a two-edged sword: they will simply offer FTCs, go on the agency payroll or insist you use an umbrella.

[youngguy]

So you're finally catching up then.

But let's be clear, nobody can fix this mess now by talking and negotiation, it needs hard facts to demonstrate why it isn't working. And fighting for employment rights is a two-edged sword: they will simply offer FTCs, go on the agency payroll or insist you use an umbrella.

I'm not saying the employment right debate does not have issues , but as talking is not going to work what else can we do? That is not rhetorical, I genuinely would like to hear what other avenues of attack you think we have?

[malvolio]

I'm not saying the employment right debate does not have issues , but as talking is not going to work what else can we do? That is not rhetorical, I genuinely would like to hear what other avenues of attack you think we have?

There are several. The key one, that might have some degree of traction, is proving that this action has cost money, increased risk and generally damaged the various Departments that have relied on casual labour. That will take time and research, sadly, but HMG are not going to be swayed by anything other than hard facts and a mass exodus of contractors from their jobs. That damage may well extend to them having to spend time on money on innumerable ET claims of course.

There's also the PR battle over the gap between HMG claiming to want and support a flexible economy while simultaneously chopping it off at the waist.

What won't win is complaining about how hard done by we are. Nobody other than us gives a damn.

[youngguy]

There are several. The key one, that might have some degree of traction, is proving that this action has cost money, increased risk and generally damaged the various Departments that have relied on casual labour. That will take time and research, sadly, but HMG are not going to be swayed by anything other than hard facts and a mass exodus of contractors from their jobs. That damage may well extend to them having to spend time on money on innumerable ET claims of course.

There's also the PR battle over the gap between HMG claiming to want and support a flexible economy while simultaneously chopping it off at the waist.

What won't win is complaining about how hard done by we are. Nobody other than us gives a damn.

As you say, that will take yrs and I don't see how we get that data given HMRC wouldn't tell us how they calculated their 400m. What you are suggesting is working out the entire knock on effect....Gov don't work that way. They will compartmentalise and say they have raised x amount more in income tax. Never mind payments to projects have increased. I'm not saying your idea is bad, I am just saying I don't know how we do that?

The PR game takes time and is just words. Again, let's do that but it has no immediate effect.

Several thousand contractors demanding a rise or starting ETs (or whoever we can) is an immediate headache for Gov. I don't pretend to understand how to do that. Hence why I think ipse with some legal and employment experts could lead the way