Reply to: 2 month contract with BT

[Dark Black]

Previously contracted through Experis and found them to be a decent agency and always settled invoices on time - wasn't asked for bank statements, although the end client wasn't BT.

Never ever been asked for bank statements for a gig anywhere actually - the usual proof of ID and address in the form of Passport / Utility bills etc but never bank statements. Wouldn't produce them either, none of their business.

[That Pettifer Woman]

I worked for BT on a 2 month contract and had a similar onboarding experience.

I needed to be sc cleared just because there was a team looking at live customer data in the same room as me, even they were 100 feet away. Not only that, I had to use an iris recognition device just to enter the office.

Good contract though.

[WTFH]

Late starts, cheap breakfasts/canteen and a lovely gym all packed into a 7 hr day. Those were the days.

Ah yes, but it's a phone company - what's the car parking like?

[vadhert]

I had a 3 monther at BT a long time ago.

I left around 7 years later.

Late starts, cheap breakfasts/canteen and a lovely gym all packed into a 7 hr day. Those were the days.

[BR14]

Why are you just trying to put blockers up all the time?"In that case maybe it's not so good. So what do you suggest? Scrap it? It's just one thing in an arsenal of checks. Why can't you see the bigger picture?

because his nose is to the grindstone, and his view of the immediate future is obscured by a few square inches of blood-soaked carborundum??

[northernladuk]

No, it shows that somebody with access to that account (e.g. joint account holder) is at liberty in the UK (or other agreeable country)

Why are you just trying to put blockers up all the time?"In that case maybe it's not so good. So what do you suggest? Scrap it? It's just one thing in an arsenal of checks. Why can't you see the bigger picture?

[fidot]

Also your bank statements will show you have been in the UK (or some other agreeable country) instead of in a terrorist training camp.

No, it shows that somebody with access to that account (e.g. joint account holder) is at liberty in the UK (or other agreeable country)

[SueEllen]

No, I'm not disagreeing that they might be asking for this reason. I'm merely pointing out that it doesn't prove anything and that there is a better way (CRB) anyway.

You mean DBS don't you?

If you are on remand it won't show up as you haven't been convicted yet.

Also your bank statements will show you have been in the UK (or some other agreeable country) instead of in a terrorist training camp.

[Cirrus]

Considering the number of sarcastic responses I have seen on other threads, this doesn't seem to be a good place to post questions. I will find another forum where the users are less interested in being trolls.

You get trolled because your post smells of entitlement. Contractors are used to standing on their own two feet. They have to cope with the whims and scummy behaviours of clients. It's permies and the underclass who always think someone else is tasked with sorting out problems.

Your original post didn't question the legality as much as pose the question "Can I use some law to stop them pushing me around yet still give me the job I want?"

As long as you adopt that permie attitude you will attract derision here, and quite likely elsewhere.

[radish2008]

I literally have no idea why they would ask. That is my whole point. They don't prove anything anyway. If there is a requirement to check for a criminal record, CRB is a more comprehensive check, which is being performed anyway.

And 2 sets of checks have never overlapped when hiring someone into a contract have they ...

[LondonManc]

I literally have no idea why they would ask. That is my whole point. They don't prove anything anyway. If there is a requirement to check for a criminal record, CRB is a more comprehensive check, which is being performed anyway.

Doesn't exist, so no use whatsoever.

[fidot]

Exactly.
So you're prepared to argue that anyone who suggests possible reasons is completely wrong, based on you having no idea.

No, I'm not disagreeing that they might be asking for this reason. I'm merely pointing out that it doesn't prove anything and that there is a better way (CRB) anyway.

[northernladuk]

Garbage. You've never worked for one of the major consultancies have you? They don't produce their individual's bank statements when putting workers (employee or contractor) onto client site.

That is because they have a completely different legal framework around their engagement and that framework will take in to account the relevant risk factors of that engagement. I don't know the exact details but there will be all sorts of overarching legal agreements and due to the size of the companies involved some of that risk can be transferred or dealt with at a high level than individuals.

You simply cannot compare the risk approach of a large company bidding on fixed price work to a one man band that has zero notice and can close his company at the drop of a hat. They need different approaches and in a one man company it's going to be belt and braces which means assessing the risk of every person that walks through the door.

Claiming a client carrying out due diligence on an individual makes the B2B agreement a sham is ridiculous. The same individual is likely to have to go through H&S and IT policy processes when they get there. Does that make them employees as well?

[WTFH]

I literally have no idea why they would ask. That is my whole point.

Exactly.
So you're prepared to argue that anyone who suggests possible reasons is completely wrong, based on you having no idea.

[fidot]

So, why do they want to see his bank statements?

I literally have no idea why they would ask. That is my whole point. They don't prove anything anyway. If there is a requirement to check for a criminal record, CRB is a more comprehensive check, which is being performed anyway.