• 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!
Collapse

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 "terminology or real problem?"

Collapse

  • Ignis Fatuus
    replied
    Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
    I dont see why you are making an issue of the agent saying 'your line manager.' What the agent says is worth frack all. What matters is your contract and working practices.

    Even if you do get investigated for IR35, the client will call whoever is immediately above you on the organisation chart your 'line manager \ manager.'
    Yes, I suppose that's so.

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    I believe that I said exactly the opposite: that of course the client has to approve an expense, I am not questioning that. What I did question was the use of the term "line manager".

    I do take your point that it's only semantics. But then so is "employer"/"client".
    I dont see why you are making an issue of the agent saying 'your line manager.' What the agent says is worth frack all. What matters is your contract and working practices.

    Even if you do get investigated for IR35, the client will call whoever is immediately above you on the organisation chart your 'line manager \ manager.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Ignis Fatuus
    replied
    Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
    What, so you expect an additional expense doesnt need client sign off?

    I think you know it has to be signed off by someone at the client. As for the agent saying 'line manager,' so what? Its only semantics at the end of the day.
    I believe that I said exactly the opposite: that of course the client has to approve an expense, I am not questioning that. What I did question was the use of the term "line manager".

    I do take your point that it's only semantics. But then so is "employer"/"client".

    Leave a comment:


  • Contreras
    replied
    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    Agency gives you a decent IR35-friendly contract. Then someone at agency's accounts says that something or other has to be approved by "your line manager". Do you:
    shut up and carry on?
    reply that you don't have one?
    say "that must be me, I'm the director"?

    ISTM that you either step into D&C, or annoy the crap out of the people who process your payments by consincing them that your head is up your arse, or take the piss and not get paid.
    This is just a telephone or email conversation with agency back-office staff, right? I'd go with option 1: "shut up and carry on", anything else is going to confuse them.

    What matters more is how the "line manager" sees themselves, and you, and how they would respond to a few leading questions from HMRC.

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    Agency gives you a decent IR35-friendly contract. Then someone at agency's accounts says that something or other has to be approved by "your line manager". Do you:
    shut up and carry on?
    reply that you don't have one?
    say "that must be me, I'm the director"?

    ISTM that you either step into D&C, or annoy the crap out of the people who process your payments by consincing them that your head is up your arse, or take the piss and not get paid.
    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    It is a question of client approval for expenses incurred in travel to other sites as requested by the client. I wouldn't think there is a problem with that in principle, but I objected to the phrase "line manager". Or is it OK for a contractor to admit to having a "line manager"? I suggested "responsible person authorised by the client".
    What, so you expect an additional expense doesnt need client sign off?

    I think you know it has to be signed off by someone at the client. As for the agent saying 'line manager,' so what? Its only semantics at the end of the day.

    Leave a comment:


  • tractor
    replied
    ...

    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    So I should have RTFM? Nah....
    Trouble is, there is a dictionary definition of 'employee' but it's not been tested at law, probably neither has 'line manager' I would suggest your agent can call the person line manager, coconut, ford fiesta or whatever they like. Just keep referring to them as budget holder and you will be fine!

    Leave a comment:


  • Ignis Fatuus
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    Well the business directory says a line manager is..
    So I should have RTFM? Nah....

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    No, indeed, I don't feel it's in any way out of order for the client to have to approve expenditure. I just had this feeling that a line manager means the manager of an employee. I'm probably wrong there.
    Well the business directory says a line manager is..

    A manager who heads a revenue-generating department and is responsible for achieving an organization's main objectives by executing functions such as policy making, target setting, decision making.


    Read more: What is line manager? definition and meaning
    so wouldn't be overly worried but a quick word to see if the can use the term 'client manager' or something wouldn't do any harm I think.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ignis Fatuus
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    He probably has a budget to run and could quite possibly under serious travel restrictions so to get approval in perfectly reasonable. Just because you are a contractor doesn't mean you can spend their money when you want and can ride roughshod over any cost saving/regulatory process's in place. It is still professional to respect a clients method of doing business. Just because they are micro managing travel costs doesn't mean you are under D&C. I have been at a client where we had two total bans on travel, not even to a site 5 miles away without senior approval. Trying to get directory sign of for a 10 mile round trip was just unbelieveable so just did it and just claimed it through the company as part of my 'service'.

    When stuff like this happens ask yourself what do the other large outsourcers ,that are clearly businesses, have to do. Accenture had to follow the same process for their travel so I didn't feel it made me look like a disguised permie.
    No, indeed, I don't feel it's in any way out of order for the client to have to approve expenditure. I just had this feeling that a line manager means the manager of an employee. I'm probably wrong there.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    He probably has a budget to run and could quite possibly under serious travel restrictions so to get approval in perfectly reasonable. Just because you are a contractor doesn't mean you can spend their money when you want and can ride roughshod over any cost saving/regulatory process's in place. It is still professional to respect a clients method of doing business. Just because they are micro managing travel costs doesn't mean you are under D&C. I have been at a client where we had two total bans on travel, not even to a site 5 miles away without senior approval. Trying to get directory sign of for a 10 mile round trip was just unbelieveable so just did it and just claimed it through the company as part of my 'service'.

    When stuff like this happens ask yourself what do the other large outsourcers ,that are clearly businesses, have to do. Accenture had to follow the same process for their travel so I didn't feel it made me look like a disguised permie.

    Leave a comment:


  • LisaContractorUmbrella
    replied
    It isn't unreasonable for expenses (disbursements) to require authorisation - as long as that is the only indication of control I wouldn't have thought the terminology would make too much difference

    Leave a comment:


  • Ignis Fatuus
    replied
    Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrella View Post
    What happens in reality - if you don't need approval for anything from anyone then it is not unreasonable to ask to have the clause removed; if you do then the clause is reasonable and you are probably not, in reality, outside IR35
    It is a question of client approval for expenses incurred in travel to other sites as requested by the client. I wouldn't think there is a problem with that in principle, but I objected to the phrase "line manager". Or is it OK for a contractor to admit to having a "line manager"? I suggested "responsible person authorised by the client".

    Leave a comment:


  • LisaContractorUmbrella
    replied
    Originally posted by Ignis Fatuus View Post
    Agency gives you a decent IR35-friendly contract. Then someone at agency's accounts says that something or other has to be approved by "your line manager". Do you:
    shut up and carry on?
    reply that you don't have one?
    say "that must be me, I'm the director"?

    ISTM that you either step into D&C, or annoy the crap out of the people who process your payments by consincing them that your head is up your arse, or take the piss and not get paid.
    What happens in reality - if you don't need approval for anything from anyone then it is not unreasonable to ask to have the clause removed; if you do then the clause is reasonable and you are probably not, in reality, outside IR35

    Leave a comment:


  • Ignis Fatuus
    started a topic terminology or real problem?

    terminology or real problem?

    Agency gives you a decent IR35-friendly contract. Then someone at agency's accounts says that something or other has to be approved by "your line manager". Do you:
    shut up and carry on?
    reply that you don't have one?
    say "that must be me, I'm the director"?

    ISTM that you either step into D&C, or annoy the crap out of the people who process your payments by consincing them that your head is up your arse, or take the piss and not get paid.
    Last edited by Ignis Fatuus; 4 March 2013, 13:38.

Working...
X