November Budget - Stop Public sector IR35 rules coming into the Private sector

[mattfx]

+1. The problem with zero hour contracts is that the arguments we used to be able to use are no longer valid as zero hour contracts offer the same options within an employment contract.

I strongly disagree - you're talking about different types / classes of worker in completely different industries. Do you disagree that many of our roles are consultative type roles? And do you also disagree that most zero hour contracts apply to bar staff, cleaners, baristas, etc.? There's no comparison.

And before anyone goes on about the whole people can't break out of the "low skilled" element; if people want to upskill and get out of zero hour contracts there are night courses at colleges, apprenticeships and many other ways and means of doing so. However on the whole people are to lazy to do anything about it!

[eek]

good luck with that, lots of workers on zero hours contracts don't know if they'll have work tomorrow let alone in 3 months time

+1. The problem with zero hour contracts is that the arguments we used to be able to use are no longer valid as zero hour contracts offer the same options within an employment contract.

[mattfx]

good luck with that, lots of workers on zero hours contracts don't know if they'll have work tomorrow let alone in 3 months time

Not being rude, but 0 hour contracts usually apply to low skills jobs or when employing those with a lack of skills so if the employee is useless they are easy to get rid of. Obviously there are other benefits such as not having to pay people on quiet days etc.

If we are all so busy focusing on the counter argument rather than trying to put our point across then these changes are going to come into effect and we will have no-one to blame but ourselves.

Anyone who hasn't written to their MP to at least voice a concern has absolutely no right to moan if these changes get pushed through.

Don't be a Negative Nancy - try and make a difference.

[pr1]

unless I can amp up the whole "stress of not knowing whether you have another gig in 3 months

good luck with that, lots of workers on zero hours contracts don't know if they'll have work tomorrow let alone in 3 months time

[northernladuk]

Vast distances?

[mattfx]

Sent my letter in Email form to Maria Miller today... Bit long winded but I wrote the entire thing myself.

Dear Maria,

I am writing to you to voice my extreme concerns over the proposed IR35 tax legislation changes in the private sector which were reported in the Financial Times on Sunday, 29th of October. Please could you pass my comments below on to the treasury.

IR35 is legislation pertaining to disguised or hidden employees: Contractors who, in the main, are performing duties similar to a permanent member of staff for an end client. The proposed changes shift the responsibility of definition for being inside or outside of IR35 from the contractor, on to the hiring agency / end client. The changes would see any fines when a contractor is found to be inside IR35 are then passed on to the client, rather than the contractor.

Whilst this sounds like an insignificant change, the implementation of it in the Public Sector earlier this year lead to a mass walkout of contractors in a number of public bodies such as TFL and the NHS, leaving projects unfinished and a general skills shortage within the Public Sector market. This happened because none of these public bodies wished to risk the chance of being fined for contractors found to be within IR35, so they deemed all of their contracting roles to be "inside" even if the role patently wasn’t.

Being inside of IR35 means that contractors cannot expense items such as hotel visits or flights – many of us within the flexible work force need to expense such items in order to work. Some of us travel vast distances for very niche roles and as such, have a requirement to off-set travel costs against tax. Furthermore, Theresa May and Philip Hammond said earlier in the year that a contractor earning £100,000 a year should be taxed in the same manner as a permanent member of staff earning the same wage. Why? Permanent members of staff have a fixed commute and fixed expenses. Flexible contractors have no fixed commute, no fixed expenses and most importantly - no fixed income. Whilst on occasion the duties we perform in some roles may appear similar, the fact we can do it in such a flexible manner gives us great value to the clients on the hiring end of the agreement, often saving them significant amounts of money.

Genuine contractors such as myself also face the prospect of being out of work every three to six months, have highly niche and often highly stressful projects to carry out, have additional paperwork and administration costs such as accountancy firms and business liability insurance incurred. For a contractor to earn as much take home pay after holidays, time off sick and very often, time off between contracts, we need to earn a significant amount more than our permanently employed counterparts. Gross salary is typically used as a weapon against us in debate, but whilst a permanent member of staff enjoy their 25+ paid holiday and 5 paid sick days per annum, any holiday days we elect to take are unpaid and any serious unplanned sickness can cause catastrophic financial damage. This I feel is never really highlighted when discussion around contractors / flexible workers are held.

To be clear; I am all for HMRC tackling genuinely disguised employees, contractors who are reaping tax benefits of running a PSC but have been at their client for a number of years doing the same role they did when they started. That is fair. However, to unfairly punish genuine contractors by making such a large sweeping change to IR35 legislation is unfair and would cost micro businesses such as mine tens, of thousands of pounds a year.

Lastly, implementing this change will cause a disastrous skill shortage in the flexible work force; I predict a large number of us would no longer feel incentivised to put up with the aforementioned risks and instead, would look to take permanent jobs. This would actually have a negative effect on the market, with highly skilled contractors applying for relatively averagely paid permanent positions, salary's for other permanent members of staff could end up being reduced do to the heightened skill ceiling and overall, devaluing the permanent market.

I look forward to your comments.


Hopefully that about sums it up!?

[mattfx]

If the proposed IR35 changes come in, I would almost be better off going back to my permie job I was at before going contracting, as it stand today. In fact, because I couldn't claim any travel.. I almost certainly would be better off because my last job was 3 miles from my house.

I have had a lot of sad recent events, none of them particularly relevant unless I can amp up the whole "stress of not knowing whether you have another gig in 3 months, plus lifes stress" thing... Don't know, might be an angle... I'm happy to speak out.

[Lost It]

Agree, being a plumber in your fifties and having to get underneath sinks and drains is a tough gig.

Sorry to hear about your illness, I hope it sorts itself out soon.

Yes. Life's a beeitch then you die... And it's not anyone's fault c had a bash at me. Forgot to mention Plumbers. Sorry. But again they are a very valuable part of the art of building stuff. And usually make good managers as well.

[TheFaQQer]

A human interest story until they realise you earned £70+k last year and everyone is blinded to all those quite correct points. Even if you are spending £30k on expenses, people will fixate on the big number and lose compassion. "Oh you'll have to switch to cava" etc

That's why you don't discuss the numbers - you discuss the issues that you can win the argument on, such as the expenses you bear yourself, the downtime that you don't get paid for, the sickness cover etc.

Being able to say "yes, but when I was hospitalised for six weeks I had no income, my client wouldn't wait, I lost the business and it took me six months of no income before I found another contract" puts things in perspective.

[d000hg]

Arguing on numbers is difficult for people to understand - particularly when the headline percentages aren't in line. That's true whether you are trying to explain to a permie, a journalist, an MP or anyone else.

Where the argument can be made that people understand is around what we have to pay for that they don't - holiday pay, sick pay, jury duty cover, pensions, maternity / paternity pay, insurance, risk that the clients disappear without paying.

And each of those has a "human interest" element to it that people can relate to.

A human interest story until they realise you earned £70+k last year and everyone is blinded to all those quite correct points. Even if you are spending £30k on expenses, people will fixate on the big number and lose compassion. "Oh you'll have to switch to cava" etc