Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[RonBW]

It's so easy, suity could do it:

-- LOWEST HANGING FRUIT
SELECT DISTINCT
x.ni_number, x.agency_id, x.role_id
from
(select ni_number, agency_id, role_id from workers where paydate < '2017-04-06' and inside_ir35='N') x
JOIN
(select ni_number, agency_id, role_id from workers where paydate > '2017-04-06' and inside_ir35='Y') y
on x.ni_number = y.ni_number and x.agency_id = y.agency_id and x.role_id = y.role_id 

-- SECOND WAVE
SELECT DISTINCT
x.ni_number, x.agency_id, y.role_id
from
(select ni_number, agency_id, role_id from workers where paydate < '2017-04-06' and inside_ir35='N') x
JOIN
(select ni_number, agency_id, role_id from workers where paydate > '2017-04-06' and inside_ir35='Y') y
on x.ni_number = y.ni_number and x.agency_id = y.agency_id

What about those where the pay date = 2017-04-06?

[jamesbrown]

What about those where the pay date = 2017-04-06?

That's the third wave, aka "project ha ha".

[londonlad]

New agency implies new contract which means the work may be vastly different to what they were doing in March. Same agency implies nothing changed within the contract so if you are inside in April when the end client made the determination surely the same end client suspects you to be inside in March.

How about new agency but same organisation with new contract (working through Umbrella)? Does that bear red flag as well?

[rob s]

New agency implies new contract which means the work may be vastly different to what they were doing in March. Same agency implies nothing changed within the contract so if you are inside in April when the end client made the determination surely the same end client suspects you to be inside in March.

Yeah, I'm looking at 5 new roles, 2 of them PS and both of those are new client and different agency.

One of the roles has had what looks like a modest rate uplift (it's pretty good for PS), the other can't even answer the question about whether the determination has been made yet.

[LondonManc]

What about those where the pay date = 2017-04-06?

You'd give it a month before you ran it to make sure that the victims contractors are paid and fully caught before springing the trap; many will be that far in shock at their reduced pay-packet that they won't care someone has discretely dropped their pants and lubed them up in readiness for phase two.

[seeourbee]

You'd give it a month before you ran it to make sure that the victims contractors are paid and fully caught before springing the trap; many will be that far in shock at their reduced pay-packet that they won't care someone has discretely dropped their pants and lubed them up in readiness for phase two.

You seem to have a recurring unusual predilection for talking about lube. Very revealing.

[LondonManc]

You seem to have a recurring unusual predilection for talking about lube. Very revealing.

You seem to have picked up on. Even more revealing.

[MrMarkyMark]

You seem to have a recurring unusual predilection for talking about lube. Very revealing.

Not very unusual on CUK, actually, use the search function for further details

[eek]

How about new agency but same organisation with new contract (working through Umbrella)? Does that bear red flag as well?

You need to look at https://www.gov.uk/government/public...eport-template (for that is the data HMRC have to play with). By the looks of it, it doesn't ask for client organisation details.

[LondonManc]

Not very unusual on CUK, actually, use the search function for further details

Indeed. We suggest lube because we know HMRC won't use it.