Clueless .....

[Denny]

[remove]

[kramer]

come on denny four lines is my attention limit... that longer than some specs i've had!

[MarillionFan]

No wonder you don't have a job.

[wendigo100]

I've always found Hays IT very accomodating on the IR35 front. Are you sure it's as bad as you think?

[chicane]

No wonder you don't have a job.

Seconded - if I insisted on each contract I work on being totally IR35 safe (if such a thing exists), I'd be either very poor by now, or back in full time employment.

The problem, Denny, with your approach, is for every job that you refuse to take on, there'll be somebody willing to work for the same or a lower rate under the IR35 risky contract/conditions set by the client and/or agency.

The risk of being caught inside IR35 is one of low probability and high impact - somewhat similar to that of being involved in a car crash. But do you refuse to get in your car because of that risk? Of course not.

[ratewhore]

The agency is question is Hays IT who will now be duly crossed off my addy list along with Computer People.

How many addys do you have left on your list now Denny?

[IR35 Avoider]

Contractors are nearly all temps. They always will be, because that's what the clients want. Refusing to supply what the customer wants is hardly being business-like.

Despite being temps, many contractors apparently manage to do the "I'm a business" song-and-dance convincingly enough to defeat HMRC when investigated.

Turning down work just because you don't think the IR35 camouflage isn't good enough is madness. Talk about tail wagging dog. Just take the contract, insert some meaningless clauses which give you some wriggle-room to argue with HMRC, and hope you don't get investigated. That's what 99% of contractors do.

[Churchill]

Contractors are nearly all temps. They always will be, because that's what the clients want. Refusing to supply what the customer wants is hardly being business-like.

Despite being temps, many contractors apparently manage to do the "I'm a business" song-and-dance convincingly enough to defeat HMRC when investigated.

Turning down work just because you don't think the IR35 camouflage isn't good enough is madness. Talk about tail wagging dog. Just take the contract, insert some meaningless clauses which give you some wriggle-room to argue with HMRC, and hope you don't get investigated. That's what 99% of contractors do.

I couldn't agree more.

You're temps, get used to it!

Apart from Threaded of course, he owns half of Denmark!

[bobhope]

Are you then as difficult to work with once you've got the job?

You see, the reason contractors are used is because it's meant to be easy and flexible. Easy to hire, easy to fire. If you start raising a fuss with a thousand different questions, terms, procedures, etc. they might as well get a permie.

[wendigo100]

If you read my post above, you will see that it is (as bad as I think).

The guy I spoke with seemed clueless about IR35.

The reason I ask is that I agree with the other posters on here. It would be a shame to pass up the chance of a good gig for what you have described.

I cross the IR35 bridge if and when I get an offer. When I'm looking for work, the IR35 aspects of a contract are low on my list of priorities. That's because it is usually possible to find bits of any job that would put me outside IR35, and it only takes one or two of those to close the case if I have the insurance.

I agree that agents should know more about all regulations, not just IR35, as part of their job, and be prepared to be flexible with contracts. As I said in an earlier post, Hays IT modified contracts at my request on both the times I have worked through them.

However many agents aren't as clued up, especially the inexperienced ones. If it really is a concern for you in future, I suggest you speak to a senior figure at the agency and politely discuss it with them.