Yasmin analysis

[administrator]

You presumption that you can talk for everyone shows what a ignorant **** you are.

Please be polite in the business forums. NLUK's first post suggesting words failed him, whilst not what you wanted to hear, does not mean that you should then start handing out abuse.

Everyone is telling you the same thing - and I concur. Bidding on a £200K fixed project is not the same as a bum on seat contractor that is part of a wider project and is basically being told what to do. As others have said, switch up your business model if you want, but I can't see how you can bend this scenario to cover general PS contracting.

[cojak]

And if you think that requirements gathering and management is part of D&C, it just shows that you don't understand how contractor Business Analysts work.

[breaktwister]

And if you think that requirements gathering and management is part of D&C, it just shows that you don't understand how contractor Business Analysts work.

I know very well how business analysts work. The word "requirements" can have a very wide meaning. Where is the line drawn between working with the client on their requirements (including ongoing changes) and taking "work instructions similar to an employee". What if the end-client was making daily/weekly changes to requirements and needed Yasmine onsite to manage those changes? Would she then be deemed as working "in a similar manner to an employee"?

We all know many many employees that take requirements from their employer and go off and deliver by a certain deadline with milestones, checkpoints included etc. Why is what Yasmine doing so different to that of an employee in terms of the actual work?

This is no-where near as clear cut as everyone here attacking me is making out.

[LondonManc]

I know very well how business analysts work. The word "requirements" can have a very wide meaning. (1) Where is the line drawn between working with the client on their requirements (including ongoing changes) and taking "work instructions similar to an employee". (2) What if the end-client was making daily/weekly changes to requirements and needed Yasmine onsite to manage those changes? Would she then be deemed as working "in a similar manner to an employee"?

We all know many many employees that take requirements from their employer and go off and deliver by a certain deadline with milestones, checkpoints included etc. (3) Why is what Yasmine doing so different to that of an employee in terms of the actual work?

This is no-where near as clear cut as everyone here attacking me is making out.

(1) Very simple; you make someone document a requirement, especially when you're on a fixed price - you can then evaluate whether it is scope creep or simply a clarification of a larger original requirement.

(2) Then there's a bigger issue here that needs raising. If there is significant deviation from the original specification then the whole deliverable should be re-evaluated along with the business case. This is as much an issue for Yasmin as for the client.

(3) What do you think? I think that she's delivering something very specific for a fixed price. How many permanent members of staff work like that?

[eek]

Why is what Yasmine doing so different to that of an employee in terms of the actual work?

All the risk and all the management of that risk.

Until you understand why and how the risk is different in that case to the other examples we really can't help you any further...

[northernladuk]

All the risk and all the management of that risk.

Until you understand why and how the risk is different in that case to the other examples we really can't help you any further...

Exactly this. You are trying to understand a completely different model by trying to compare it to what you do. You just can't do that. It's too different.

This is no-where near as clear cut as everyone here attacking me is making out

I am afraid it is. 5 different people have indicated so.

[LondonManc]

I know very well how business analysts work. The word "requirements" can have a very wide meaning. Where is the line drawn between working with the client on their requirements (including ongoing changes) and taking "work instructions similar to an employee". What if the end-client was making daily/weekly changes to requirements and needed Yasmine onsite to manage those changes? Would she then be deemed as working "in a similar manner to an employee"?

We all know many many employees that take requirements from their employer and go off and deliver by a certain deadline with milestones, checkpoints included etc. Why is what Yasmine doing so different to that of an employee in terms of the actual work?

This is no-where near as clear cut as everyone here attacking me is making out.

Who is attacking you? NLUK speaks like that to everyone and the rest of us are simply answering your questions. It's your wont that you don't like the answers given and somehow interpret them as an attack.

[breaktwister]

You have to remember that the client will have to completely change their method of engagement to get a Yasmin in. They have to use a different frame work, put it to tender, have a couple of companies in to review their offering, make a decision, get them on board with all sorts of contracts. You have to be on that framework, do the pre-work for the tender, turn up and present and then wait.

You can't just flip it to something else to avoid a new tax rule. This is another level of understanding you need to get to rather than massage the odd detail here and there.

I admit I don't know much about this process. This is a valuable post from you for once. So, if a PSC contractor is claiming that they are providing a true business-to-business service, their company accepts various risks and obligations on a T&M or fixed price basis, then it should technically go through this business tender process?

[MrMarkyMark]

I admit I don't know much about this process. This is a valuable post from you for once. So, if a PSC contractor is claiming that they are providing a true business-to-business service, their company accepts various risks and obligations on a T&M or fixed price basis, then it should technically go through this business tender process?

Such a wise one after just 28 posts

To be fair, you are just one of a recent number that thinks they are going to be able to knock a square peg into a round hole.
If you understand, even slightly, how these things work in practice you know this isn't going to be possible.


And the best thing is, we were just sitting round waiting for you to all turn up

[breaktwister]

All the risk and all the management of that risk.

Until you understand why and how the risk is different in that case to the other examples we really can't help you any further...

Sorry but it is you that is failing to understand the legal transfer of risk. I understand it which is why I said earlier that transfer of risk is at the heart of whether there is a true business relationship in play. Most PSC contracts assume the risk of delivering to the clients requirements which is why we have to use that structure and have Professional Indemnity insurance.

The point is that HMRC wishes to ignore all of this and is not using ownership of risk as a determining factor anywhere - they want to focus on working practice only while ignoring which party assumes the risk.

This could well be fatal to their position if argued correctly in Court.