• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.

chancellor-will-create-crisis-self-employed

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Swamp Thing
    replied
    Originally posted by mattfx View Post
    There are also those who are more respectful of the Contractor / Hiring Manager relationship and its very large differences between that of employer / employee. I think some hiring managers assume that having an outside contractor on-site is just another body added to their head count.
    A lot also depends on recruitment agencies, their knowledge of the issue and their appetite to unify behind a counter-solution. I've spoken with a number of agencies in the last week or two. I'm afraid their knowledge of this issue is shockingly ignorant or complacent. No contingency thinking, no awareness of what the REC and IPSE have so far said. Most think the brollies will come to the rescue somehow

    I think the agencies will throw us under the bus. At the end of the day for them, a fee is a fee, whether it's an inside or outside decision.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoredBloke
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Some are already.

    Though it depends on the background of the people who are in charge.
    The public sector has to compete with the private sector for talent. If they are facing the situation where they can't recruit a particular skill set on an inside basis, because the contractors have fled to the private sector outside IR35 contracts, then perhaps the only way they can currently fill the role is to advertise it as outside also. If the private sector suddenly starts offering the role as inside, then the private sector will be able to follow suit.

    Leave a comment:


  • bobspud
    replied
    Just so you know that while telling the world that there will be no room to up rates, someone wandered past me the other week and offered me 750 for an HMRC role.

    I turned it down for two reasons.

    1) Im not working in Southend -EVER-
    2) Im not prepared to take work that is project based and has no mutuality of obligation while being taxed as an employee when it contravenes the law as it stands.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattfx
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Everything depends on the background of the managers in charge.

    There are some who are more legally aware than others.
    There are also those who are more respectful of the Contractor / Hiring Manager relationship and its very large differences between that of employer / employee. I think some hiring managers assume that having an outside contractor on-site is just another body added to their head count.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
    Smaller companies with fewer contractors will be more likely to offer outside roles imho. Why? Because they can say that they're bringing a specialist in with skills that they don't have. They'll also be keener on costs and wanting to get value for money. A £450/day outside contractor will be better, in theory, than a £450/day inside guy.

    That said, large companies may do it on a day rate limit - anyone over, say, £500/day is a specialist and should be deemed outside. Thoughts?
    Everything depends on the background of the managers in charge.

    There are some who are more legally aware than others.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
    There's also the potential now, given the exodus, that PS departments will start pushing roles outside IR35 to attract staff back.
    Some are already.

    Though it depends on the background of the people who are in charge.

    Leave a comment:


  • LondonManc
    replied
    Originally posted by BoredBloke View Post
    I don't buy it that private sector companies are going to be more willing to offer outside roles. There are plenty of risk averse companies out there who will want to take the safest option. And if out inside rates become too expensive, there's always Wipro and the like.
    Smaller companies with fewer contractors will be more likely to offer outside roles imho. Why? Because they can say that they're bringing a specialist in with skills that they don't have. They'll also be keener on costs and wanting to get value for money. A £450/day outside contractor will be better, in theory, than a £450/day inside guy.

    That said, large companies may do it on a day rate limit - anyone over, say, £500/day is a specialist and should be deemed outside. Thoughts?

    Leave a comment:


  • ProInDisguise
    replied
    Originally posted by BoredBloke View Post
    I don't buy it that private sector companies are going to be more willing to offer outside roles. There are plenty of risk averse companies out there who will want to take the safest option. And if out inside rates become too expensive, there's always Wipro and the like.
    I think initially companies will lean towards an inside determination whilst they figure things out. Rates may go up for inside roles to compensate but not by very much... maybe £50 on a £500 per day role. Rates could also go down on outside roles though as there will be far more competition for a smaller number of roles.

    I do think though that overtime this change may encourage companies to really get their head around IR35 and start to treat contractors in the correct manner. The flexible workforce is a valuable resource for companies and they are still going to require it in the future. Some minor changes in working practices and a less risk averse approach to substitution and the problem will be solved.

    Recently I had to regularly sit in the vicinity of a director who was running a project that was looking at contractors and consultancies in a major bank. He had developed a classification to distinguish between the two.. Contractors were supervised and Consultancies were unsupervised was the mantra heard over and over again. The lack of understanding in respect to how flexible workers should be treated was really troubling. This change may solve that problem and actually remove a headache that contractors have been having for many years.

    I'm am going to make the jump to perm for a couple of years (at least) while they figure it out though. My role is outside currently but I do not have the energy to spend months fighting with HR over what CEST says I am or am not. Trying to explain IR35 to these people is a stress I don't need in my life.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tasslehoff
    replied
    Originally posted by bobspud View Post
    ^^^

    And lets not forget that everyone that feels aggrieved about being shoved inside Ir35 only needs to gather evidence of their true situation and make a claim to HMRC if found to be correct they will get a tonne of cash back. I would expect a tsunami of piss to be swamping HMRC and the naughty blanket assessment causing departments in the run up to Tax end

    There might even be a swath of ambulance chasing PPI type claims to be made out of unfair damage to the business by incompetent civil service bods making incorrect assumptions.
    Gosh, I really hope this is the case.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoredBloke
    replied
    I don't buy it that private sector companies are going to be more willing to offer outside roles. There are plenty of risk averse companies out there who will want to take the safest option. And if out inside rates become too expensive, there's always Wipro and the like.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X