Help - My Agency are forcing me to go Umbrella from Ltd Company can they do this??
seems to be 50/50 whether they can or cannot do this.
The retention on these umbrellas is a joke, it's better to look for another contract if this is the case
- 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.
Logging in...
Previously on "Help - My Agency are forcing me to go Umbrella from Ltd Company can they do this??"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Vallah View PostDoesn't the pay during a break have to be at least 50% of the last contract rate?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SunnyInHades View PostThe umbrellas listed (Parasol, Contractor Umbrella and Paystream) have recently adopted the "Swedish Derogation" opt-out model . Under this scheme 'contractors' who sign up become 'full time' permie employees of the umbrella with pay between assignments (probably minimum wage) and are hence exempt from AWR.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SunnyInHades View PostThe umbrellas listed (Parasol, Contractor Umbrella and Paystream) have recently adopted the "Swedish Derogation" opt-out model . Under this scheme 'contractors' who sign up become 'full time' permie employees of the umbrella with pay between assignments (probably minimum wage) and are hence exempt from AWR.
Most who enter contracting usually do so for reasons including...
a) to be paid a shed load of money often and frequently, usually weekly
b) to take time off as and when required between contracts, as the whim takes - could be as extreme as 6 months working, followed by 6 months off, followed by 3 months working
c) to be their own ‘boss’ away from traditional permie practices such as org charts, performace appraisals, hours of working, etc.
I'd be interested to know which Swedish Derogation umbrellas can offer the above (especially b) to their 'contractors' (permies).
Swedish Derogation Umbrella ‘Contractor’ = Permie
And anyone that has worked through a correctly structured umbrella company in the past would have been their employee anyway with a full over-arching contract of employment. So again, no change from how umbrella contractors have always worked.
Leave a comment:
-
So let's look at the legislation Agency Workers Regulations section 3:
(2) an individual is not an agency worker if—
(a)the contract the individual has with the temporary work agency has the effect that the status of the agency is that of a client or customer of a profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual; or
(b)there is a contract, by virtue of which the individual is available to work for the hirer, having the effect that the status of the hirer is that of a client or customer of a profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual.
Oooh, that's as clear as mud. Another piece of stupid legislation that agencies will interpret which ever way benefits them and if it ever does get challenged in court then the agent will either back down or it will take 10 years to come to trial anyway.
Another waste of everyone's time, just like the Conduct of Employment Agency Regulations...
Leave a comment:
-
The umbrellas listed (Parasol, Contractor Umbrella and Paystream) have recently adopted the "Swedish Derogation" opt-out model . Under this scheme 'contractors' who sign up become 'full time' permie employees of the umbrella with pay between assignments (probably minimum wage) and are hence exempt from AWR.
Most who enter contracting usually do so for reasons including...
a) to be paid a shed load of money often and frequently, usually weekly
b) to take time off as and when required between contracts, as the whim takes - could be as extreme as 6 months working, followed by 6 months off, followed by 3 months working
c) to be their own ‘boss’ away from traditional permie practices such as org charts, performace appraisals, hours of working, etc.
I'd be interested to know which Swedish Derogation umbrellas can offer the above (especially b) to their 'contractors' (permies).
Swedish Derogation Umbrella ‘Contractor’ = Permie
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sockpuppet View PostThat seems a logical solution. If you're on less than £200 a day then being a contractor probably doesn't stack up being a Ltd anyway.
If you've got a proper business in your own right skill and can command more I don't think you need to be worried.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Steven@Parasol View PostIts not strictly true that Limiteds are out of scope. DBIS did this intentionally to stop dodgy agency forcing their fruit pickers, clearners etc to form limiteds just to dodge the legislation.
just to follow up on Wanderers point, we are seeing some agencies introduce rate benchmarks with respect to AWR.
So any workers they are on less then £10 per hour for example will be asked to go agency PAYE. £11 to £25 workers are being moved to an umbrella so that all the risk is mitigated by the umbrella, anything over £25 per hour for a limited is fine.
This is very much down to the risk profile of the agency. Some agencies are concerned that contractors on lower rates working via their own limited on less than £25 per hour rates are more likely to retrospectively bring a claim against the hirer. Asking them to work via an umbrella mitigates this.
If you've got a proper business in your own right skill and can command more I don't think you need to be worried.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostIn which case, why not explain why rather than issue veiled threats and FUD?
We've been sending comms out to all our contractors and the majority have been comfortable with the changes to their copntracts of employment. largely because take home pay has not been affected as a result.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Steven@Parasol View PostIts not strictly true that Limiteds are out of scope. DBIS did this intentionally to stop dodgy agency forcing their fruit pickers, clearners etc to form limiteds just to dodge the legislation.
just to follow up on Wanderers point, we are seeing some agencies introduce rate benchmarks with respect to AWR.
So any workers they are on less then £10 per hour for example will be asked to go agency PAYE. £11 to £25 workers are being moved to an umbrella so that all the risk is mitigated by the umbrella, anything over £25 per hour for a limited is fine.
This is very much down to the risk profile of the agency. Some agencies are concerned that contractors on lower rates working via their own limited on less than £25 per hour rates are more likely to retrospectively bring a claim against the hirer. Asking them to work via an umbrella mitigates this.
Leave a comment:
-
Its not strictly true that Limiteds are out of scope. DBIS did this intentionally to stop dodgy agency forcing their fruit pickers, clearners etc to form limiteds just to dodge the legislation.
just to follow up on Wanderers point, we are seeing some agencies introduce rate benchmarks with respect to AWR.
So any workers they are on less then £10 per hour for example will be asked to go agency PAYE. £11 to £25 workers are being moved to an umbrella so that all the risk is mitigated by the umbrella, anything over £25 per hour for a limited is fine.
This is very much down to the risk profile of the agency. Some agencies are concerned that contractors on lower rates working via their own limited on less than £25 per hour rates are more likely to retrospectively bring a claim against the hirer. Asking them to work via an umbrella mitigates this.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostYou might, but it rather depends what contract Alllergies has with the end client and what it says about rehiring (or what the client has to pay Allergies if that's what they do). That might block you rather more effectively
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by blacjac View PostSerious Question.
Could you not use this as an opportunity to cut out the agent and go direct?
If the agency are refusing to work with your limited company, is it not them who are preventing the working relationship from happening, therefore there is no losses to them if you tell them to sod off and go direct....?
Ulitmately the whole thing is a crock of ordure. There is infintely less risk from using a Ltd Co contractor under AWR than there is using an umbrella contractor. And since the brollied one is in scope of the AWR, you would have to replace them every 11 weeks to forestall that risk completely. In other words, go from a safe, stable engagement to an unsafe, unstable one. Brilliant.Last edited by malvolio; 21 September 2011, 08:47.
Leave a comment:
-
Serious Question.
Could you not use this as an opportunity to cut out the agent and go direct?
If the agency are refusing to work with your limited company, is it not them who are preventing the working relationship from happening, therefore there is no losses to them if you tell them to sod off and go direct....?
Leave a comment:
-
Very possibly true, excpet that I have seen the discussions with DBERR about the implementation of the AWR and despite the gold-plated caveats in the legislation, the intention has always been that Ltd Co contractors are out of scope. But we won't know until it goes to court.
Someone is pancking here anyway, probably Allegis, more likely the end client. Seven working days to completely restructure a range of contracts doesn't sound like forward planning to me.
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: