Reply to: First Contract - IR35 and enforced lunch

[DirtyDog]

Which makes me a little uncomfortable - not the first bit, but the bit about compulsory lunch. I just wondered if this was normal, should I be worried from an IR35 perspective etc? This appears to be an agency clause, rather than a client cause.

Do they insist on everyone doing that? If they do, then there's nothing to worry about because taking a lunch break like that doesn't differentiate you at all.

If you don't want to take the break, don't - but don't knock off early or bill for that time to make up for it.

[vwdan]

Yep that's true but you eluded to knowing Jack about it which was what I was picking up on. A fair knowledge will give you enough of a basis to understand some aspects that pop up.

Why ban it? IR35 can never be fully covered but some of the guys asking the basic questions could do with researching first. The enforced lunch is an odd one that isn't distinctly covered. I wasn't taking a pop at this situation, just the fact you said you knew Jack as I already mentioned.

Fair one - I was just trying to stress that I know how much I have to learn in the real world of contracting. I've spent hours and hours reading this place (Which is why I already have PCG+, QDOS insurance and SJD doing my accounts), but even so, it's a bit different when you're putting pen to paper!

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Agree with what's been said - I don't think this would be an indicator towards IR35 in itself but I know that HMRC do look at whether or not you are integrated into the workforce and therefore effectively behaving in the same way as a permie would. If this is the only issue of control I don't think you have much to worry about but I would look at what else the client will be expecting from you and whether or not it would be what they would also expect from their permanent staff

[northernladuk]

And I've read a serious chunk of it, but I don't have the knowledge to assess every single impact - in particular, the enforced lunch which I'd never heard of.

CUK may aswell ban IR35 questions completely if it's already all been 100% covered.

Yep that's true but you eluded to knowing Jack about it which was what I was picking up on. A fair knowledge will give you enough of a basis to understand some aspects that pop up.

Why ban it? IR35 can never be fully covered but some of the guys asking the basic questions could do with researching first. The enforced lunch is an odd one that isn't distinctly covered. I wasn't taking a pop at this situation, just the fact you said you knew Jack as I already mentioned.

[vwdan]

Try harder I am afraid. There is a hell of a lot of IR35 stuff out there and 1000's of questions on here on every aspect of it you can imagine. Not knowing it is not a get out, particularly when it is pretty simple to defend yourself.

And I've read a serious chunk of it, but I don't have the knowledge to assess every single impact - in particular, the enforced lunch which I'd never heard of.

CUK may aswell ban IR35 questions completely if it's already all been 100% covered.

[northernladuk]

So, I'm just going through the process to secure my first contract - I completely accept I'm a newbie, know jack all but I have tried looking. And, yes, QDOS will be reviewing my contract.

Try harder I am afraid. There is a hell of a lot of IR35 stuff out there and 1000's of questions on here on every aspect of it you can imagine. Not knowing it is not a get out, particularly when it is pretty simple to defend yourself.

[GB9]

Ok, just to go against the grain, I think the bit about not going home until work is complete and a manager says so is direct control and an indicator of IR35.

I certainly wouldn't agree to that but would be amazed if actually happened on the ground so wouldn't worry too much.

[The Spartan]

Thanks all - I really appreciate your answers. I'm sure I am over thinking it, but I'm desperate to get my contracting career stared right and it's all just so foreign to me.

It's been a long time since anyone really paid attention to how I work, so I guess I'm just a little sensitive to it.

No worries at least you're being vigilant about it rather than like other contractors I know who don't even know what IR35 is lol before long you'll be a pro at it I'm only two years into contracting and this site is amazing for knowledge. Once you master the search you often find that you end up posting in general more than anywhere else

[d000hg]

Quite right too.

I don't buy this "I'm off at 4 today cos I worked me lunch" nonsense and I wouldn't insult a client by pulling it.

Agree with that, but forcing a whole hour's break is a bit annoying if you don't like to go out for lunch. Sitting reading a book at your desk for an hour makes me feel like I'm being looked at for not working sometimes

[vwdan]

Thanks all - I really appreciate your answers. I'm sure I am over thinking it, but I'm desperate to get my contracting career stared right and it's all just so foreign to me.

It's been a long time since anyone really paid attention to how I work, so I guess I'm just a little sensitive to it.

[kevpuk]

As others have said, I would not be worried about such things. In all likelihood, it is simply a catch-all from the Client/Agency to ensure that you have been told that you cannot work without any breaks etc., which would contravene basic HaSaW rules.

I think the IR35 implications are pretty much nothing with this alone. Lunch within a certain time period may well be pragmatic - e.g onsite facilities only open 12-2 or something. Break times are another thing......but, again, not really an indication of direction and control in my opinion.

My current gig is away from anywhere to get lunch, so you either have to bring your own or eat at one of the on-site places. Lunch is available, roughly, between 11.30 and 1.45, so if you wanna eat you go in these times! Permies actually get £5/day credited to their ID cards for lunch.......I do not (not just me all contractors) As for breaks, I pretty much just wander off as and when I want, and have done in most places - be it for a cigarette, coffee etc. Client always knows that work is being done, and this is how it should be - I don't work 9-5, I work a professional day and this usually amounts to around 8hrs in the office, minus odd breaks. One Client did once mention that they only supported one break in the morning, one in the afternoon and that I should follow permie guidelines.......to be "fair" to the permies.......I resisted and argued that I was in the office longer, started earlier and was working entirely different things to the permies and I would take a break as and when I felt I needed one....to which Client backed down.

[The Spartan]

It's nothing to flap over in all fairness as you should take at least 30 mins break if you work over 6 hours a day, here I take my lunch whenever I feel like it and it can vary between 30 mins - 2 hours. I choose when I get to take my lunch and the client has no problem with this, so relax and chill my friend it's nothing to get worked up about obviously you're just covering your bases but there are worse things that have happened at sea

[Clare@InTouch]

From a control point of view I think it's a very small issue, if one at all. You should be more concerned about How, When and Where you do the work - most especially How. If you can prove that you're not subject to control over how you do what you do, then being restricted over where and when you work due to commercial considerations isn't a problem in my view.

[northernladuk]

ContractorCalculator has some references to lunch times being an indicator of control. I think though it's more a case of telling you when you have to have lunch - Mandating one from a H&S point of view seems more reasonable.

With that being said a mandatory lunch hour would make an offer less attractive to me. Especially as I'm generally spent after 4 or 5 hours, unless there are meetings and stuff.

I don't see it as an IR35 problem. Easy to argue you go along with their request out of professional courtesy. Just like adhering to client dress policy for example.

I do think it's a storm in a tea cup anyway. I don't think I have ever worked anywhere that had mandatory breaks like this. Seen plenty of cases where lunch has to be taken between these times but not mandated you must take exactly this time. Working practices will trump the paperwork so ask around befoee worrying.

[SpontaneousOrder]

ContractorCalculator has some references to lunch times being an indicator of control. I think though it's more a case of telling you when you have to have lunch - Mandating one from a H&S point of view seems more reasonable.

With that being said a mandatory lunch hour would make an offer less attractive to me. Especially as I'm generally spent after 4 or 5 hours, unless there are meetings and stuff.