So I think its finally dawned on IPSE's management

[westtester]

I do actually know that. But Eek is not making a lot of sense either, and his "I know how to fix this" nonsense is starting to wear thin. Easy to be very wise after the event, but none of his previous efforts have done a hell of a lot of good either, have they.

FWIW IPSE are engaging in a serious discussion about how to go forward with this now. Feel free to join in.

I've been paying for membership of PCG/IPSE for some years now and benefits aside, I've yet to see any improvement in the situation for contractors. What exactly have they achieved, given the situation we find ourselves in? Can you imagine 5 years ago if we'd known that we'd now be arguing to get employment rights? What a f---in mess.

[SussexSeagull]

I would suggest IPSE put out a press release saying something like 'we shall be examining what employment rights contractors in the public sector should be receiving now it has been decided they are under SDC'.

Make the powers that be know there maybe consequences.

[bobspud]

Can you imagine 5 years ago if we'd known that we'd now be arguing to get employment rights? What a f---in mess.

Wonder what would have happened if we had gone for the jugular in 1999 when this first cropped up.

[eek]

Wonder what would have happened if we had gone for the jugular in 1999 when this first cropped up.

Things would have been clear, and clients would be very clear on how they treat us.

[jonnyboy]

So let me ask another question....

What about the online test re SCD... what about if SCD is not in place? what about if you had a strongly worded document that said you could do everything needed as you saw fit with no control in place?

Re : IR35:Substitution, control and mutuality of obligation :: Contractor UK

If there is no SCD, does this mean that it gets a NO on the electronic test, therefore free of IR35?

I know people say that agents will not take the risk, but if the tool says NO, there is evidence of no SCD, and the consultation document states that "the HMRC will stand by the result of the tool", does this mean all of this is not an issue?

[SussexSeagull]

Wonder what would have happened if we had gone for the jugular in 1999 when this first cropped up.

From memory there were less employee rights then to aim for. I think minimum paid holiday came in in about 2005?

[eek]

So let me ask another question....

What about the online test re SCD... what about if SCD is not in place? what about if you had a strongly worded document that said you could do everything needed as you saw fit with no control in place?

Re : IR35:Substitution, control and mutuality of obligation :: Contractor UK

If there is no SCD, does this mean that it gets a NO on the electronic test, therefore free of IR35?

I know people say that agents will not take the risk, but if the tool says NO, there is evidence of no SCD, and the consultation document states that "the HMRC will stand by the result of the tool", does this mean all of this is not an issue?

That depends on how risk adverse the person running the test is. If you were gambling £10-20k of your own companies money would you take the risk?

[SussexSeagull]

So let me ask another question....

What about the online test re SCD... what about if SCD is not in place? what about if you had a strongly worded document that said you could do everything needed as you saw fit with no control in place?

Re : IR35:Substitution, control and mutuality of obligation :: Contractor UK

If there is no SCD, does this mean that it gets a NO on the electronic test, therefore free of IR35?

I know people say that agents will not take the risk, but if the tool says NO, there is evidence of no SCD, and the consultation document states that "the HMRC will stand by the result of the tool", does this mean all of this is not an issue?

Problem is I really can't see anyone in the public sector taking the risk. If and when it goes into the private sector some clients might see it as a way to get better people on board but that is a conversation for another time.

[bobspud]

Problem is I really can't see anyone in the public sector taking the risk. If and when it goes into the private sector some clients might see it as a way to get better people on board but that is a conversation for another time.

The choice for them is not about risk. It's about using the right type of resource and right framework contract for the task. So if they want a help desk team, using contingency labour one is right but then it makes it clear that they normally need to retain SDC and that causes them the AWR problems.

That means it's not sensible to put everyone on cl1 there was is also a special framework for strategic stuff (consultancy one)

I am guessing that when the dust settles next year you will see lots of digital outcome framework awards and consultancy one for architecture...

Both Consultancy one and doc leaves the SDC to the person delivering the resulting solution...

[eek]

FWIW IPSE are engaging in a serious discussion about how to go forward with this now. Feel free to join in.

Visits IPSE's forums. Wtf, and omg are the things that come to mind. I literally face palmed myself reading one thread a minute ago.

If that's a serious, on topic, focused discussion in your eyes I'm glad I've never worked with you.