IR35 PS - So anyone had the discussion yet?

[b r]

Why would HAYS need that? It is for the PS client to determine IR status. Incompetent pricks heys.

My OH was sat with her PS client yesterday, and the client said that she was waiting on the agent to determine the status of the contractors so that they (the client) would know what's occurring...

[eek]

After a month and a half discussions with agencies and Legal, current ClientCo came out with a statement that all contractors working on projects (like myself) will be declared outside IR35. For the rest they will review them on case by case with the strong desire to not declare anyone inside.

Paper work is to be updated in the coming weeks. If it actually happens I will be happy panda.

And that's how it should be - provided everything doesn't suddenly become a project...

[daemon]

After a month and a half discussions with agencies and Legal, current ClientCo came out with a statement that all contractors working on projects (like myself) will be declared outside IR35. For the rest they will review them on case by case with the strong desire to not declare anyone inside.

Paper work is to be updated in the coming weeks. If it actually happens I will be happy panda.

I wish this place were like that. Unfortunately they arent grasping the implications for their PSO, and they're letting their "contractors are paid to much anyway" small minded personal emotions cloud their view.

[Andy Hallett]

After a month and a half discussions with agencies and Legal, current ClientCo came out with a statement that all contractors working on projects (like myself) will be declared outside IR35. For the rest they will review them on case by case with the strong desire to not declare anyone inside.

Paper work is to be updated in the coming weeks. If it actually happens I will be happy panda.

Which is just as bad IMHO. The assessment should be individual. You need to assess the working practices of the role and working practices of the business [contractor].

The danger is you then all get dragged in by the folk who act, and expect to be treated like disguised employees.

[sal]

Which is just as bad IMHO. The assessment should be individual. You need to assess the working practices of the role and working practices of the business [contractor].

The danger is you then all get dragged in by the folk who act, and expect to be treated like disguised employees.

Not sure that i follow. ClientCo reviewed the working practices and decided it treats the contractors working on projects not as disguised employees. I agree that this is the case on my end. If a contractor then decides he is being treated like a disguised employee and declares him/herself being inside IR35 - it's no business of mine.

Who is in danger of being dragged, me or the ClientCo or the Agency?

[northernladuk]

Not sure that i follow. ClientCo reviewed the working practices and decided it treats the contractors working on projects not as disguised employees. I agree that this is the case on my end. If a contractor then decides he is being treated like a disguised employee and declares him/herself being inside IR35 - it's no business of mine.

Who is in danger of being dragged, me or the ClientCo or the Agency?

I would be very surprised if many PS clients don't think they can move PM's on to new work when the old one has finished. Nearly every PM at my last gig were working on a number of Projects and seemed to move/start new ones regularly. I'll bet every penny I have most of them didn't have a proper schedule of work at the beginning and did not get new contracts/schedules for the extra work.

They can declare everyone outside as much as they want but if the reality is the client wants a PMs to prop up their Delivery area because it's not properly resourced there is going to be huge problems. Think of it as BAU Project Managers. Not good.

All this being told if you are in and out and tools etc is all very good but if the BoS doesn't work hard to keep his outside status in tact then people will be no better off, in fact much worse than they are now under the old IR35 rules.

[eek]

I would be very surprised if many PS clients don't think they can move PM's on to new work when the old one has finished. Nearly every PM at my last gig were working on a number of Projects and seemed to move/start new ones regularly. I'll bet every penny I have most of them didn't have a proper schedule of work at the beginning and did not get new contracts/schedules for the extra work.

They can declare everyone outside as much as they want but if the reality is the client wants a PMs to prop up their Delivery area because it's not properly resourced there is going to be huge problems. Think of it as BAU Project Managers. Not good.

All this being told if you are in and out and tools etc is all very good but if the BoS doesn't work hard to keep his outside status in tact then people will be no better off, in fact much worse than they are now under the old IR35 rules.

Sorry but in your example they are bringing PMs in and treating them identically to employees so surely they are inside... If they are claiming that the PM is outside and then directing them to particular issues as required supervising what they are working on as an Agency I would be very annoyed about their false declaration...

[northernladuk]

Sorry but in your example they are bringing PMs in and treating them identically to employees so surely they are inside... If they are claiming that the PM is outside and then directing them to particular issues as required supervising what they are working on as an Agency I would be very annoyed about their false declaration...

We know that. The clients and many of the contractors don't though. It's the same false assumptions that they've been working under for many years. Look at the people coming to the forums. Years in PS, can't leave, no contract checks, suddenly learning about CoA and thrashing about trying to understand what they should already know. And that's the cream of the crop because they've made the effort to come on here.

This should be starting a big cultural change in how clients see their contractors and how the contractors behave in a gig but it's not. It's all about getting a new contract, mass declarations of outside and getting the result they want from the tool. In many cases nothing will change on the ground so yes they should be saying inside for many contractors and HMRC have got it bang on the nose for many of these people. It seems to be about playing games with contracts and polishing up situations that shouldn't be.

It would be a wise client that takes a long look at themselves and say, actually, 90% of our delivery teams are contractors because we can't find perms so yes we use them as PM's so all inside. It would show an understanding of their situation but would introduce a huge risk they'll all leave. Most will just play the game in semi-ignorance as they have all along.

I could be wrong, there could be a big cultural shift to proper contracting... but I doubt it.

[NHS1979]

Further chats with the PSB today - this time from the very top, which was nice.

Their approach is that they need to try again to recruit permanent people and some adverts are done and more to come. In the meantime they want to keep the best contractors working for them on critical projects.

I have already told them I am leaving end of March, and this has triggered various options being chewed over by them. Basically:

1.stay with them in a re-thought role still outside IR35 at their risk
2. with them in a similar role now inside IR35, but with rates lifted 30% to compensate
3.move to a different PSB that does stuff with them too, still doing some stuff for them - again in a re-thought role still outside IR35
4.move to a different PSB that does stuff with them too, still doing some stuff for them - in a similar role now inside IR35, but with rates lifted 30% to compensate

All of the above options are +\- the current agency I'm with, and with me being asked to almost write my own re-thought JD (I would need to see a good example). They will also not respond to the agency pushing for a determination before end of March as not relevant.

I think 1 and 2 are a no - and 3 or 4 could work. I am still nervous of all 4 re retro though so still seeking advice. The other option is to turn all 4 down and just walk

[northernladuk]

Last option IMO but your situation is different to me I believe.