So I think its finally dawned on IPSE's management

[eek]

Actually Eeks's approach is very simple to put into effect. If you want employee rights, go get a permanent position and stop whining at those who don't want one and have no need of those rights. Or join an umbrella. And stop calling yourself a contractor (or a freelance, take your pick). Meanwhile those who want to remain contractors will be fighting this as best they can.

Have fun, I'll leave you to it.

And if that's the IPSE's approach every role from 2019 will have the following characteristics :-

1. The role will be inside IR35 (safest bet for the end client - no real cost to them).
2. The agency will insist you use an umbrella.
3. Contracting has died.

You need to work out how to ensure point 1 isn't the default option - and the only people who seem to have thought about this have all reached the same opinion....

Which is the reason why I believe we need to fight for employment rights if forced inside IR35. I did assume your and others in IPSE could work out why....

[MrMarkyMark]

Actually Eeks's approach is very simple to put into effect. If you want employee rights, go get a permanent position and stop whining at those who don't want one and have no need of those rights. Or join an umbrella. And stop calling yourself a contractor (or a freelance, take your pick). Meanwhile those who want to remain contractors will be fighting this as best they can.

Have fun, I'll leave you to it.

I just don't agree with this statement.
How do you propose it is fought the best it can, it hasn't worked up to now?

The way this will pan out, will be driven by law and pure economics, they are the only sharp tools left.
I'm very much a specialist who goes in and tells the client how to improve systems and business processes and I know you do part of the same.
Our value is the multitude of skills and experience we have of working for different clients, working with different nationalities, working directly with board members etc. certainly not gained from perm employment.
Point being you shouldn't be able to tax someone given the risks we take, and the services we provide as a pure PAYE employee.
If it is deemed we should be PAYE, then we should be employed and given the same rights as any other employee, that is becoming the law.
Economics then comes into play and I believe that will force another way to work as a proper freelancing contractor.

[eek]

I just don't agree with this statement.
How do you propose it is fought the best it can, it hasn't worked up to now?

The way this will pan out, will be driven by law and pure economics, they are the only sharp tools left.
I'm very much a specialist who goes in and tells the client how to improve systems and business processes and I know you do part of the same.
Our value is the multitude of skills and experience we have of working for different clients, working with different nationalities, working directly with board members etc. certainly not gained from perm employment.
Point being you shouldn't be able to tax someone given the risks we take, and the services we provide as a pure PAYE employee.
If it is deemed we should be PAYE, then we should be employed and given the same rights as any other employee, that is becoming the law.
Economics then comes into play and I believe that will force another way to work as a proper freelancing contractor.

Sadly I believe that argument is far too complex for IPSE to understand. I think we need to go back to basics...

Companies need to be given a reason for them to insist and work with us to ensure we are outside IR35. Unless we do that we will end up inside....

Malvolio's comment shows why, sadly, none of IPSE's current management are up to the job and that includes all the candidates. I'll ignore an earlier comment today on the IPSE forum which shows that it can take him 18 months and mulitple explanations to understand a point.

[bobspud]

Actually Eeks's approach is very simple to put into effect. If you want employee rights, go get a permanent position and stop whining at those who don't want one and have no need of those rights. Or join an umbrella. And stop calling yourself a contractor (or a freelance, take your pick). Meanwhile those who want to remain contractors will be fighting this as best they can.

Have fun, I'll leave you to it.

But your rather simplistic position is exactly why IPSE needs to die. They wasted ten years trying to prove the issue the wrong way. it's not please sir I'm a business in my own right. Please don't treat me how you want and then leave me with the fallout. It's about getting the clients to finally see the difference between employee->temp->contractor. If we need to hold their feet over the fire for blurring the lines then that will be the end game. You no longer have the choice about pretending you are not affected.

[MrMarkyMark]

Sadly I believe that argument is far too complex for IPSE to understand. I think we need to go back to basics...

Companies need to be given a reason for them to insist and work with us to ensure we are outside IR35. Unless we do that we will end up inside....

Malvolio's comment shows why, sadly, none of IPSE's current management are up to the job and that includes all the candidates. I'll ignore an earlier comment today on the IPSE forum which shows that it can take him 18 months and mulitple explanations to understand a point.

True and very unfortunate.

To me its very clear and I witnessed the persecution of the construction industry and running a LTD over the years.
My whole family, including my step parents, all run companies, so I have a solid understanding of how business works.

In essence, cost has to be the driver and I think this workers rights bandwagon is the one to join.
To get it into the public realm that this has the potential to cost more than it brings in.

[eek]

True and very unfortunate.

To me its very clear and I witnessed the persecution of the construction industry and running a LTD over the years.
My whole family, including my step parents, all run companies, so I have a solid understanding of how business works.

In essence, cost has to be the driver and I think this workers rights bandwagon is the one to join.
To get it into the public realm that this has the potential to cost more than it brings in.

The thing is thats a very simple argument that people and newspapers can understand.

1. I'm working as if I am an employee
2. I'm taxed (by the client) as if I am an employee
3. I'm not being treated the same way as others employees are

And if IPSE can't understand it and won't fight for it we need public sector contractors to pick one union and join on mass.

And from there we have a position to start from.

[GB9]

The thing is thats a very simple argument that people and newspapers can understand.

1. I'm working as if I am an employee
2. I'm taxed (by the client) as if I am an employee
3. I'm not being treated the same way as others employees are

And if IPSE can't understand it and won't fight for it we need public sector contractors to pick one union and join on mass.

And from there we have a position to start from.

Which brings me back to what I said 4 years ago. We need a proper representative body that actually promotes the benefits of genuine contractors and distinguishes them from BOS disguised employees.

What we don't need is a group that doesn't understand what the Government and HMRC want.

So, how do we make it happen?

[eek]

Which brings me back to what I said 4 years ago. We need a proper representative body that actually promotes the benefits of genuine contractors and distinguishes them from BOS disguised employees.

What we don't need is a group that doesn't understand what the Government and HMRC want.

So, how do we make it happen?

Create one. The problem is who has the time to commit to doing so. Last year I started one until people round here started really annoying me. And I don't really have the interest anymore. I also have far less time.

I personally think the gmb is probably the way to go.

One big advantage were we go to ahead would be that our crm system would be state of the art rather than half baked even after £00,000s had been spent on it. If anyone is going ahead I'll happily do that side of things, it's my day job and would give me something I can sell to others.

And already I'm being sucked back in.

[mudskipper]

From IPSE's CEO's email to members yesterday

Make no mistake we will be seeking legal advice to find out if we can challenge whether it’s fair for a contractor to be taxed like an employee – without receiving employee rights.

From IPSE's response to the consultation

The cost of defending a claim at tribunal vary depending on the case, but they are rarely insignificant. If only one determination is challenged at tribunal, it is likely to use a significant proportion of the £500,000 that HMRC has earmarked for implementing the new rules.

...

Further tribunal costs will result from those seeking employment rights, as a result of being taxed like an employee. (Section 10 explores this point in more detail.)

From IPSE's post earlier in this thread

It is early days and we'll be working on a full analysis and response, and we'll be continuing to lobby with evidence-based research and hand-in-hand with other industry bodies. However "We can't be treated as businesses and taxed as employees." is a pretty good starting point.

IPSE spent nearly £1m backing a member all the way to the House of Lords before, and we'd be prepared to do the same again (to the Supreme Court).

I'm unsure where the idea that IPSE has ruled out fighting for employment rights for IR35 caught PS roles has come from. It is very much on the table.


Everyone is disappointed by yesterday's news. It seems to me that we need to work together, not fight with each other.

[eek]

From IPSE's CEO's email to members yesterday



From IPSE's response to the consultation



From IPSE's post earlier in this thread




I'm unsure where the idea that IPSE has ruled out fighting for employment rights for IR35 caught PS roles has come from. It is very much on the table.


Everyone is disappointed by yesterday's news. It seems to me that we need to work together, not fight with each other.

Nope, it seems to me especially after that email regarding Hudson's yesterday that IPSE are less prepared for the battle ahead than I am.

The fact you are disappointed also tells me an awful lot. I wasn't disappointed yesterday, because I expected it to come - the only thing I was disappointed by was IPSE who seemed utterly unprepared for what was the most likely outcome.

Oh and its nice to be outed on the IPSE forums. I won't play the same games there or here.