Reply to: Fix Term Contract - they keep postponing the start date

[northernladuk]

There's nothing to debate. You had a chance to get out of it gracefully. You did not take it. No more no less

Least I didn't come out of it with likes from Simes and Fraidy.... sucks to be you

[BR14]

Why exactly the chuff, are we arguing about short term, permie roles in a contractor’s forum?

WGAFF?????

ftfy

[Lance]

Why exactly the chuff, are we arguing about short term, permie roles in a contractor’s forum?

Who cares?????

[jamesbrown]

After more than 2 years on an FTC (even if that was is multiple FTCs/extensions), the employee has the same redundancy rights as other full time employees.

Fixed-term employment contracts: Employees' rights - GOV.UK

Not quite (edit: oh wait, you're talking about redundancy rights, not permanency rights). If the original contract exceeds four years, then it won't happen until first renewal. It can also be avoided if there were "objective grounds" for the fixed-term contract (i.e., that the nature of the requirement was objectively temporary). Universities routinely renew FTCs beyond 2 years, although relying on fixed funding is probably not enough to meet the "objective grounds" (Ball vs. University of Aberdeen).

[PCTNN]

Yeah bit out of date on that bit but on the upside with you posting on the thread I still look like a ****ing genius

Dunno why you are still so angry though. Post some more facts and lets debate it.

I posted facts when I said that the FCTs I've come across were offering the same benefits of permies.

Last I've come across was offering pension, bonus, sick-pay, holidays, life insurance, private healthcare, money voucher to get your home office set up, even cycle to work scheme.

And the facts turned out to be true, as it is the law.

There's nothing to debate. You had a chance to get out of it gracefully. You did not take it. No more no less

[simes]

After more than 2 years on an FTC (even if that was is multiple FTCs/extensions), the employee has the same redundancy rights as other full time employees.

Fixed-term employment contracts: Employees' rights - GOV.UK

Ta.

[northernladuk]

Looks like the only fact that came out of this thread is that your knowledge about FTCs and FTC employees rights is dated and therefore nil.:

Yeah bit out of date on that bit but on the upside with you posting on the thread I still look like a ****ing genius

Dunno why you are still so angry though. Post some more facts and lets debate it.

[PCTNN]

Everything I've put is just stating the facts of the case. You are saying FTCs are good and I'm using facts to prove they aren't. I'm not trying to validate anything, just correcting your facts. This one is black and white as I've pointed out. FTCs are ******* awful and serve no one. I've evidenced why. Don't get upset at me for delivering the message. Best way to attack me is to prove facts to counter my argument. Just having a pop at my character isn't the way.

Doing that is just going get Simes and Fraidy liking you so you can join their club and I'm sure that's much worse than debating facts with me.

I'm guilty of a lot but I've done nothing wrong on this one. Facts shouldnt trigger you.

Looks like the only fact that came out of this thread is that your knowledge about FTCs and FTC employees rights is dated and therefore nil.

Go read the page linked by Paralytic before you post again in this thread

[Paralytic]

Yesterday, I spoke to a German based recruiter. He had interesting European perspective on FTCs.

Germany is famous (and I know this for a fact) for giving company employees 30 days annual leave and 3 months notice period.
So from an employers perspective, FTCs have the advantage allowing client-co to take on staff for 6 or 12 months and then they have less hassle binning resources, if and when they need to.

I also agree with NLUK, you are better to have a permanent job over a FTC, because you have employee protection and legal rights.
In FTC they can bin you and they do not have to a give credible reason ("due to productivity / due to performance / due to absence / due to lack of enthusiasm"). In other words, grevious procedures are the responsiblity of the employment agency or umbrella company (facade) and not to client co. FTCs, then, are a weakened employment type with an enforced time limit without stocks and shares, bonus, gym and restaurant (*not that we need these in COVID) and health / life insurance etc

And as we know in the UK, FTCs do not allow you to claim business expenses before tax!

Is the highlighted bit how it works in Germany? Because that's not the FTC employment laws in the UK.

[Paralytic]

They talk about the same benefits as perms and it might have changed over the years but I know BUPA weren't offering the same health insurance they did to permies. As I say that might have changed but I'd be surprised if many FTC's are truely getting exactly the same benefits. So FTC is a really poor option for perms.

FTC employees (should) have the same employment rights as any other employees doing the same kind of job. If BUPA did the same today, they'd be breaking the law.

Well, security in this case may mean something like redundancy pay if you've been there for two or more years. I am guessing with rolling FTC contracts, even if after three years of this, there's still no pay out.

After more than 2 years on an FTC (even if that was is multiple FTCs/extensions), the employee has the same redundancy rights as other full time employees.

Fixed-term employment contracts: Employees' rights - GOV.UK

[GigiBronz]

I'm not advocating for companies. I'm just saying that FTCs are not the worst options as suggested by the other poster, especially in the current climate.

If you take into consideration the lowering rates and the increasing taxes (inside contracts), and then consider overall package (salary and benefits) of the FTC, the 2 options are not that far off and the difference is slimming down more and more.

The time of 12+ months outside contracts at stellar rates is a distant memory. We're entering a new time of low rates, high tax contracts. The best contractors will adapt and survive; the mediocre will come here to moan

supply and demand. if there weren't so many people actually applying for those role they would have to increase the rates.

If you let yourself pushed around there won't be any change. salaries and rates have always been low. Maybe take a holiday, do something else with your life. Go on benefits and get rid of unnecessary clutter in your life.

Oh wait many people have signed up to 30y mortgages so they can't do that.

But I guess this trend will continue to go in only one way. Where would that take us, our children in the future? Everyone working on 10£/h? All day everyday?

[rocktronAMP]

Everything I've put is just stating the facts of the case. You are saying FTCs are good and I'm using facts to prove they aren't. I'm not trying to validate anything, just correcting your facts. This one is black and white as I've pointed out. FTCs are ******* awful and serve no one. I've evidenced why. Don't get upset at me for delivering the message. Best way to attack me is to prove facts to counter my argument. Just having a pop at my character isn't the way.

Doing that is just going get Simes and Fraidy liking you so you can join their club and I'm sure that's much worse than debating facts with me.

I'm guilty of a lot but I've done nothing wrong on this one. Facts shouldnt trigger you.

Yesterday, I spoke to a German based recruiter. He had interesting European perspective on FTCs.

Germany is famous (and I know this for a fact) for giving company employees 30 days annual leave and 3 months notice period.
So from an employers perspective, FTCs have the advantage allowing client-co to take on staff for 6 or 12 months and then they have less hassle binning resources, if and when they need to.

I also agree with NLUK, you are better to have a permanent job over a FTC, because you have employee protection and legal rights.
In FTC they can bin you and they do not have to a give credible reason ("due to productivity / due to performance / due to absence / due to lack of enthusiasm"). In other words, grevious procedures are the responsiblity of the employment agency or umbrella company (facade) and not to client co. FTCs, then, are a weakened employment type with an enforced time limit without stocks and shares, bonus, gym and restaurant (*not that we need these in COVID) and health / life insurance etc

And as we know in the UK, FTCs do not allow you to claim business expenses before tax!

[northernladuk]

And since I was inferring a Lack of redundancy pay, I was thus inferring an associated Lack of security.

Correct. You were right in what you say. I just added there is a limit of four years as well so makes it even less of a benefit.

[northernladuk]

what i'm not getting is your constant need of validation, everything you say is right and nothing else is.

you must be a pleasure to live with.

all i'm going to add is that the world is not black or white, most of us live in the gray so your continuous speaking using extreme terms (the worst...the best...) is just a bunch of meaningless crap

Everything I've put is just stating the facts of the case. You are saying FTCs are good and I'm using facts to prove they aren't. I'm not trying to validate anything, just correcting your facts. This one is black and white as I've pointed out. FTCs are ******* awful and serve no one. I've evidenced why. Don't get upset at me for delivering the message. Best way to attack me is to prove facts to counter my argument. Just having a pop at my character isn't the way.

Doing that is just going get Simes and Fraidy liking you so you can join their club and I'm sure that's much worse than debating facts with me.

I'm guilty of a lot but I've done nothing wrong on this one. Facts shouldnt trigger you.

[simes]

Bearing in mind a FTC can only run for four years max even having access to redundancy for that period of time is hardly security.

And since I was inferring a Lack of redundancy pay, I was thus inferring an associated Lack of security.