Reply to: "Could you take a quick look at this?" aka DAC during contracts

[northernladuk]

Just be aware what you were suggesting is more akin to a job description which we should be avoiding at all costs.

You could try getting a new schedule of work to cover yourself for occasional changes but if you do too many it becomes obvious it's just a paperwork excerise and the WP's clearly don't match what you are trying to achieve.

[Devinity]

Of course it would. It would allow the client to move us about which is a key point of our IR35 defense. You can move permies around as you fit. You want to look more like a permie?

No, which is why from the get go I arrange to have assignments as specific as possible. But having worked for several clients now (though not contracting for too long compared to most here), they also act mostly alike so I thought it must be something that people here often come up against, so was keen to hear opinions!

[northernladuk]

Then the question would be: would a more flexible contract that doesn't mention a specific project (but still relatable to your skill), with the assumption that you're happy to work on project X, Y or even Z, then be problematic from HMRC's perspective?

Of course it would. It would allow the client to move us about which is a key point of our IR35 defense. You can move permies around as you fit. You want to look more like a permie?

[Devinity]

Then the question would be: would a more flexible contract that doesn't mention a specific project (but still relatable to your skill), with the assumption that you're happy to work on project X, Y or even Z, then be problematic from HMRC's perspective?

[blacjac]

Only my opinion but....


Contract states "Software development services on system x".

Client says "Can you help out with this issue in an area of system x that you are not currently working on?"
"Sure thing, as long as you are happy with my current task being delayed".

Client says "Can you have a look at this new requirement for system Y to say if its feasible?"
"Sorry but I'm only working on system x, you would have to speak to Mr Bloggs to find out who can look at that"

No D&C and client is happy.




When answering the IR35 question "Can you be moved on to another project" I always interpret it as "If your current project ended and the client asked you to keep busy by cleaning the kitchen, would you have to do it?"

Makes about as much sense as the current rules do.....

[northernladyuk]

I believe he needs to take a long hard look at himself.

He may be over valuing exactly what he is

PC sees expensive as a negative attribute for a contractor,

[MrMarkyMark]

You are being unfair and need to understand that contractors operate within a wide range of environments. PC has already been warned that if he refuses work again, his dole will be sanctioned for 6 months, so what do you suggest?

an awkward expensive prima donna sitting there in the corner.

I believe he needs to take a long hard look at himself.

He may be over valuing exactly what he is

[northernladyuk]

It does depend, indeed, on how you have or present the conversation.
As you have alluded to, on here, any type of negotiation isn't your strongest point.

I refuse work often, due to this sort of thing, I still get extended so make of that what you will.

You can see a couple of examples earlier in the thread of excuses I have used.

Budgetary
Insurance

Covers most situations

You are being unfair and need to understand that contractors operate within a wide range of environments. PC has already been warned that if he refuses work again, his dole will be sanctioned for 6 months, so what do you suggest?

[MrMarkyMark]

Depends - act like an awkward tw*t and you won't have a contract to worry about. I've seen it happen.

Yeh of course you've got to draw the line somewhere but, remember, most clients dont get it and really dont want an awkward expensive prima donna sitting there in the corner.

It does depend, indeed, on how you have or present the conversation.
As you have alluded to, on here, any type of negotiation isn't your strongest point.

I refuse work often, due to this sort of thing, I still get extended so make of that what you will.

You can see a couple of examples earlier in the thread of excuses I have used.

Budgetary
Insurance

Covers most situations

[northernladyuk]

Depends - act like an awkward tw*t and you won't have a contract to worry about. I've seen it happen.

Yeh of course you've got to draw the line somewhere but, remember, most clients dont get it and really dont want an awkward expensive prima donna sitting there in the corner.

So where do you draw the line?

[psychocandy]

Depends - act like an awkward tw*t and you won't have a contract to worry about. I've seen it happen.

Yeh of course you've got to draw the line somewhere but, remember, most clients dont get it and really dont want an awkward expensive prima donna sitting there in the corner.

[m0n1k3r]

Am wondering how most IT contractors here deal with clients who like to think that they are hiring temporary employee devs who they can get to jump onto different projects as they see fit.

So far, it's been my opinion that from a DAC point of view, for a fixed-length of time contract it's best if I can at least agree up front the project that I will be assigned so that this can go into the assignment schedule, rather than have a more generic "Supplier of development services." or something similar, which seems to me to demonstrate DAC. Do you think it really does make a difference?

That said, even with that in place it's all too easy for someone to pop by your desk when you're there to say that they're in a bind as someone is off sick and could you assist with a particular issue that afternoon / next 2 days. "Could" is not often really a question

What is the best approach to this?

Ask for a statement of work for that new, urgent thing. If asked why, say it's for compliance (which it is). Agencies and clients use "for compliance" all the time so that they won't have to explain, and so should you.

Had you been working in Germany, for example, then the client would have insisted on presenting you with a clear statement of work for that separate thing, or else they would probably fall under the "disguised employment" rules there, meaning that they would have to pay employer's NI (backdated) as well as a penalty provide paid leave and sick pay on top, and probably put in a fixed price for those two days.

[teapot418]

So - looking purely at the questions in the tool, the question is:

"Can the end client move the worker to a different task or project than they originally agreed to do?"

And the 'ideal' answer is "No - that would need to be arranged under a new contract or formal agreement"


Something like "software services" in your schedule, whilst it goes against everything we know about IR35, would allow that question to be answered to put you outside, whereas "Development of the widget management system" would be more restrictive.

[fidot]

IMO, an amendment to the contract schedule is the "proper" way to address work outside the original contract. Achieving this is obviously harder where an agency is involved.

[LondonManc]

You may class it as DAC while a true business classes it as a sales opportunity; ergo, you're inside.