• 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 "Epidemiologist role"

Collapse

  • Old Greg
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    Who will rid us of this troublesome sockie?

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by elsergiovolador View Post
    I thought one is paid for the work done and not where is located?

    Leave a comment:


  • elsergiovolador
    replied
    Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
    Try reading what I said. The rate is a good rate for the location.

    The IR35 status could have been assessed properly - you have no clue as to whether they've used the EST tool or not. No substitution for starters, I'd expect.
    It's how you write the contract - there are few rules how to make it "inside" to avoid employment law and remove the risk of HMRC investigation. The CEST is just to confirm you got it "right".

    I thought one is paid for the work done and not where is located?

    Leave a comment:


  • LondonManc
    replied
    Originally posted by elsergiovolador View Post
    What's good about that? They just participate in employment law avoidance. If they want employee, they should look for an employee.
    Try reading what I said. The rate is a good rate for the location.

    The IR35 status could have been assessed properly - you have no clue as to whether they've used the EST tool or not. No substitution for starters, I'd expect.

    Leave a comment:


  • elsergiovolador
    replied
    Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
    It may be inside but they've reflected that in a very good rate for the location.
    What's good about that? They just participate in employment law avoidance. If they want employee, they should look for an employee.

    Leave a comment:


  • LondonManc
    replied
    Originally posted by quackhandle View Post
    Help us* in the fight against Covid-19.

    Epidemiologist

    *It's Inside IR35 so we're gonna shaft you on tax.

    qh
    It may be inside but they've reflected that in a very good rate for the location.

    Leave a comment:


  • quackhandle
    started a topic Epidemiologist role

    Epidemiologist role

    Help us* in the fight against Covid-19.

    Epidemiologist

    *It's Inside IR35 so we're gonna shaft you on tax.

    qh

Working...
X