• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "5 Consecutive Days Holiday Per Year"

Collapse

  • TheFaQQer
    replied
    Originally posted by MadDawg View Post
    Reckless and silly?
    No - wreckless and silly. There were no wrecks, is all SY meant.

    Leave a comment:


  • MadDawg
    replied
    Originally posted by suityou01 View Post
    This is wreckless, and a pretty silly thing to say.

    How can an IR35 pointer be minor, unless you know the context, contractural terms, working practices etc etc. If it was the straw that broke the camel's back, would it still seem minor?

    Always send your contract for a review, with someone like QDos. Always collect evidence that would support your argument should you need to in the future. If you don't know the legislation, then read up. It's your business and it affects you so get educated!!

    It sounds like CF is pretty clued up, so possibly in the minority on here?
    Reckless and silly?

    If the client won't budge, I'd say it's a calculated risk, based on the very small possibility that the gig could be IR35 caught and he gets investigated, versus the very real likelihood of getting canned because he won't follow the required administrative procedure - only really an option if he's certain he can walk straight into a new gig, or has a healthy warchest, or can survive on £71 a week or whatever the going rate is (let's hope he doesn't have a family to feed). Worst case scenario, he pays a bit of extra tax.

    Leaving himself without income sounds pretty reckless to me, but then what do I know...

    Sounds to me like you need to get in the real world suityou01 and stop recommending that OP hangs himself because of some principle.

    CF - what are the other contractors doing?

    Leave a comment:


  • suityou01
    replied
    Originally posted by MadDawg View Post
    Yes - it is a minus in terms of IR35, but only a minor one - if there is a good reason for the request (to audit the break taken for security purposes) then it's unlikely to be seen as D&C. If that is what swings outside to inside, it sounds like you're on pretty dodgy ground anyway.

    So, two options -

    1) Refuse to comply and possibly find yourself without a contract. If you're confident of your ability to walk straight into a new gig then no problem
    2) Comply, make sure as far as you can that other working practices are outside. In the unlikely event that you're investigated, make sure you've got cover. If you're still concerned you could be found to be inside, then put aside the additional tax/NI liability for this contract to cover worst case scenario and look for a new contract.

    IMO chucking a contract for an administrative requirement sounds like tail wagging the dog.
    This is wreckless, and a pretty silly thing to say.

    How can an IR35 pointer be minor, unless you know the context, contractural terms, working practices etc etc. If it was the straw that broke the camel's back, would it still seem minor?

    Always send your contract for a review, with someone like QDos. Always collect evidence that would support your argument should you need to in the future. If you don't know the legislation, then read up. It's your business and it affects you so get educated!!

    It sounds like CF is pretty clued up, so possibly in the minority on here?

    Leave a comment:


  • suityou01
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrag Meister View Post
    There is the furlough booker, IMHO making a leave request is part of having a professional approach, and keeping the client informed, rather than just emailing saying I wont be in next Monday for 2 weeks.
    How much leave entitlement do you get per annum at ClientCo?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrag Meister
    replied
    Originally posted by CourtesyFlush View Post
    And do they force you to fill out an annual leave request?
    There is the furlough booker, IMHO making a leave request is part of having a professional approach, and keeping the client informed, rather than just emailing saying I wont be in next Monday for 2 weeks.

    Leave a comment:


  • MadDawg
    replied
    Yes - it is a minus in terms of IR35, but only a minor one - if there is a good reason for the request (to audit the break taken for security purposes) then it's unlikely to be seen as D&C. If that is what swings outside to inside, it sounds like you're on pretty dodgy ground anyway.

    So, two options -

    1) Refuse to comply and possibly find yourself without a contract. If you're confident of your ability to walk straight into a new gig then no problem
    2) Comply, make sure as far as you can that other working practices are outside. In the unlikely event that you're investigated, make sure you've got cover. If you're still concerned you could be found to be inside, then put aside the additional tax/NI liability for this contract to cover worst case scenario and look for a new contract.

    IMO chucking a contract for an administrative requirement sounds like tail wagging the dog.

    Leave a comment:


  • suityou01
    replied
    That is incorrect. Cf was asked to fill out a form asking for annual leave. This would demonstrate direction and control. If it went to court and the other two tests failed he would be inside ir35. Surprised folks on here don't take this as seriously as I would. Companies such as Qdos make money out of reviewing contracts so there must be a real risk.


    Sent from my iMinion using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Taita
    replied
    Originally posted by CourtesyFlush View Post
    And do they force you to fill out an annual leave request?
    Probably..... as they do not have an alternative procedure in the system. Complying with general policy regulations does not make you an employee or compromise your IR35 status.

    Leave a comment:


  • CourtesyFlush
    replied
    Originally posted by Scrag Meister View Post
    Current ClientCo enforce a min 25 unpaid days in the year, and there must be at least 1 period of CORE absence of 2 weeks, no access, no email, no telephone.

    They probably like the fact that they save a few quid not paying us, but mainly its regulatory to avoid the rogue traders keeping their tulip hidden, and giving someone else a chance to discover it.
    And do they force you to fill out an annual leave request?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scrag Meister
    replied
    Current ClientCo enforce a min 25 unpaid days in the year, and there must be at least 1 period of CORE absence of 2 weeks, no access, no email, no telephone.

    They probably like the fact that they save a few quid not paying us, but mainly its regulatory to avoid the rogue traders keeping their tulip hidden, and giving someone else a chance to discover it.

    Leave a comment:


  • mudskipper
    replied
    Originally posted by CourtesyFlush View Post
    Thanks for your post. So the manual says " the employee must do x,y,z" and you see complying with this as not an IR35 pointer?

    It's not just folks on here may disagree, it's the fact the solicitor I paid to review the contract disagrees with you.
    IR35 pointer, but not IR35 deal breaker. Ah well.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheDandy
    replied
    Originally posted by Magpie252 View Post
    I’m working for a Swiss bank in Switzerland, my boss came up with the same requirement, however the banks HR confirmed that this did not apply to external employees.

    But, one of the PM’s on an associated project (who my boss also manages) is having this enforced in Canary Wharf – go figure?

    As to why they want this, here’s a couple of quotes from the policy document:

    ‘To help ensure the health and welfare of employees and minimize the risk of undetected employee fraud or other illicit behavior, all employees are required to take at least one leave each calendar year for a minimum of five consecutive business days (rather than calendar days) during which time the employee must not work remotely’

    ‘Supervisors/managers are responsible for taking reasonable steps to ensure that their direct reports comply with this policy, including the absence requirement, the access limitations, applicable coverage requirement, and the recordkeeping requirements. Supervisors/managers may rely on system tracking of their employees’ Required Leaves, where available. Supervisors/managers of employees on the TALT system must complete and record supervisory reviews and approvals in accordance with system requirements. All other supervisors/managers are responsible for documenting the completion of their employees’ Required Leaves in accordance with applicable requirements’


    While many will disagree here, I wouldn’t see this as an IR35 indicator, the bank is implementing a policy to reduce the risk of fraud, in the same way that they force you to use one of their laptops. The request form is their way to audit that the policy is being complied with.
    Taking holiday and complying with an on-site policy or even statutory policy are two separate things. Filling out a holiday request form is for employees. They can just tell YourCo that they are not needed for X number of days. How they meet their own administration for monitoring compliance of the policy is down to them not YourCo.

    Leave a comment:


  • CourtesyFlush
    replied
    Thanks for your post. So the manual says " the employee must do x,y,z" and you see complying with this as not an IR35 pointer?

    It's not just folks on here may disagree, it's the fact the solicitor I paid to review the contract disagrees with you.

    Leave a comment:


  • Magpie252
    replied
    Originally posted by CourtesyFlush View Post
    I wonder if any CUKers that work at or have recently worked at an IB could comment on their experiences. I'd be interested.
    I’m working for a Swiss bank in Switzerland, my boss came up with the same requirement, however the banks HR confirmed that this did not apply to external employees.

    But, one of the PM’s on an associated project (who my boss also manages) is having this enforced in Canary Wharf – go figure?

    As to why they want this, here’s a couple of quotes from the policy document:

    ‘To help ensure the health and welfare of employees and minimize the risk of undetected employee fraud or other illicit behavior, all employees are required to take at least one leave each calendar year for a minimum of five consecutive business days (rather than calendar days) during which time the employee must not work remotely’

    ‘Supervisors/managers are responsible for taking reasonable steps to ensure that their direct reports comply with this policy, including the absence requirement, the access limitations, applicable coverage requirement, and the recordkeeping requirements. Supervisors/managers may rely on system tracking of their employees’ Required Leaves, where available. Supervisors/managers of employees on the TALT system must complete and record supervisory reviews and approvals in accordance with system requirements. All other supervisors/managers are responsible for documenting the completion of their employees’ Required Leaves in accordance with applicable requirements’


    While many will disagree here, I wouldn’t see this as an IR35 indicator, the bank is implementing a policy to reduce the risk of fraud, in the same way that they force you to use one of their laptops. The request form is their way to audit that the policy is being complied with.

    Leave a comment:


  • CourtesyFlush
    replied
    Originally posted by sal View Post
    It's probably worth checking with the Agency if they had similar issues before with the same client and if they can assist you in negotiating not to use the holiday request form. They are probably in touch with non-HR manager that is more verse at dealing with contractors than some junior HR Generalist going by the book.
    Yip. Been there. Agency have been superb. Again they have had about as much luck as I have.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X