Public sector contracting

[centurian]

Mal, in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king. People wont listen and will continue to say 'it wont affect me' until it actually happens to them.

I don't blame folks for trying to push the boundaries on this - and if they can convince an FD of their argument, then good on them. So I say, go for it.

But you're right - there is a very blinkered approach on this. If PS ClientCo takes a hard interpretation on this, you're screwed - you either accept the terms and abide by them, or get terminated - simples. Just because it's possible in your own mind to form an argument - doesn't mean that ClientCo will automatically accept such an interpretation over what their paymasters will say.

[centurian]

My sense is that there will be very few people who will renew / take new contracts on such terms - I for one will not.

Very easy to say now, but much harder when you are staring a long stretch on the bench in the face. Much like all those in banking who proudly state that they would never accept a rate cut - until it hits them.

But if public sector contractors do resign en masse, it will just dramatically increase supply for private sector positions, so if you plan on coming to the private sector, you will probably find rates are lower anyway.

[Old Greg]

I don't blame folks for trying to push the boundaries on this - and if they can convince an FD of their argument, then good on them. So I say, go for it.

But you're right - there is a very blinkered approach on this. If PS ClientCo takes a hard interpretation on this, you're screwed - you either accept the terms and abide by them, or get terminated - simples. Just because it's possible in your own mind to form an argument - doesn't mean that ClientCo will automatically accept such an interpretation over what their paymasters will say.

This is the point. I'm not thinking that it will not apply. Just wondering how it will apply.

[bobspud]

I love the way contractors go on about this not affecting them. I think some people are in for a rude awakening.

Yes. The treasury are going to freak when they figure out what they just caused!

I know three guys at my new place that have already found new roles based on this. Meanwhile the department are struggling to resource 25 major change projects.

[centurian]

This is the point. I'm not thinking that it will not apply. Just wondering how it will apply.

It will apply however the FD thinks it should apply - and there could be quite a bit of variance in that respect.

The guidelines are full of holes, but the question is whether the FD is prepared to take the risk to exploit them, knowing that they face being "fined" 5 times the amount if they get the wrong interpretation. They certainly will not be keen to explain to their internal audit committee why they ended up being fined, so many may take a hardline approach.

Also remember most public sector FD's are accountants, so it's unlikely you can pull the wool over their eyes on tax matters, unless they are turning a blind eye (which many of them were doing up until now)

[bobspud]

Very easy to say now, but much harder when you are staring a long stretch on the bench in the face. Much like all those in banking who proudly state that they would never accept a rate cut - until it hits them.

But if public sector contractors do resign en masse, it will just dramatically increase supply for private sector positions, so if you plan on coming to the private sector, you will probably find rates are lower anyway.

This isnt a 25% cut its over 40 with an added **** you

[centurian]

This isnt a 25% cut its over 40 with an added **** you

How are you reaching 40%. I thought it equated to around 20% difference, less if you have Section 198 deductions - ah, are you s660-ing as well.

But even so, 60% of something is still better than 100% of nothing - and if thousands of ex public sector contractors hit the private sector market, rates will plummet - assumning you can even secure a contract.

Ironically public sector rates might nudge up a bit when they have problems filling roles, but they won't go up 40%.

[Old Greg]

How are you reaching 40%. I thought it equated to around 20% difference, less if you have Section 198 deductions - ah, are you s660-ing as well.

But even so, 60% of something is still better than 100% of nothing - and if thousands of ex public sector contractors hit the private sector market, rates will plummet - assumning you can even secure a contract.

Ironically public sector rates might nudge up a bit when they have problems filling roles, but they won't go up 40%.

I work in healthcare and there are opportunities outside the public sector - IT companies but it would limit things.

However, we will see the extent to which this applies across the public sector. I am unsure how Foundation Trusts can be forced down this route unless it is slotted into the procurement rules, which could be complicated. How would they be fined when the treasury does not fund them? Also I sometimes work as an associate via a consultancy and it will be interesting to see if these rules apply through that method of operating.

Having said all that, my current contract would be a slam duck for the new rules.

[malvolio]

You say 'not on a project' meaning > 6 months? In their eyes of course.

Who knows? BIS and DOH are applying the same rules differently, with DOH seemingly ignoring the 6 month bit (and the £220 a day bit as well).

Seriously if anyone gets one of these letters, send a copy to [email protected]. They need all the evidence they can get if they are to have any hope of bringing some sanity to the situation.

[centurian]

However, we will see the extent to which this applies across the public sector. I am unsure how Foundation Trusts can be forced down this route unless it is slotted into the procurement rules, which could be complicated. How would they be fined when the treasury does not fund them?

I agree that FT's might provide an area of temporary respite. However, 48 hours after the first case of an FT dodging these rules hits the Daily Mail, the Treasury will find a way.