"agency workers" to get "employment" rights after 12 weeks?

[Dow Jones]

Why?

Hmm.

Otherwise then it would also be the end for enture and KPMG etc.

Boomed I say.

What makes you say that SP? Surely consultancies can not be classed as agencies

[FarmerPalmer]

Could this be a backdoor method of closing down umberella companies ?

and then the "Service Companies" question on personal tax returns to
trying to find the small businesses that they can get more revenue from.

[Sockpuppet]

What makes you say that SP? Surely consultancies can not be classed as agencies

In that case neither can Ltds going direct!

This will only make ClientCos stay away from Agencies.

[boxman]

With the raft of concerns from clients about contractors acquiring employment rights if they go direct then surely this is just adding even further confusion for all parties?

The government and HMRC needs their heads banged together to sort out UK employment law and taxation properly very quickly. If the contract markets goes t*ts up in the UK then a lot of us will up sticks and go elsewhere in the world to ply our trade.

[Churchill]

With the raft of concerns from clients about contractors acquiring employment rights if they go direct then surely this is just adding even further confusion for all parties?

The government and HMRC needs their heads banged together to sort out UK employment law and taxation properly very quickly. If the contract markets goes t*ts up in the UK then a lot of us will up sticks and go elsewhere in the world to ply our trade.

There are plenty of foreign workers willing to come to this country, just say the word and I'll have a coach load of enthusiastic, highly qualified and experienced Romanians/Poles/Russians outside your company.

Churchill - In "DodgyAgent wannabe" mode!

[BoredBloke]

I think it might be a good thing. Until now there has been no financial incentive for a client to offer contracts which are outside IR35. If being a disguised employee can be seen as being a temp and as a result the contractor could have a case for employment rights, then possibly there is the chance that the client might have a financial incentive to only allow contractors who fall way outside IR35.

[Sockpuppet]

I think it might be a good thing. Until now there has been no financial incentive for a client to offer contracts which are outside IR35. If being a disguised employee can be seen as being a temp and as a result the contractor could have a case for employment rights, then possibly there is the chance that the client might have a financial incentive to only allow contractors who fall way outside IR35.

I like your thinking.

As an aside this won't help temps. We have hundreds of temp temployees on this site. After 11 weeks and 6 days we'll just bin them and get new ones.