Reply to: Hours per day/week

[b0redom]

Really, hours of work, where they are irrelevant to the job in hand, are for permies, not contractors.

Well part of my job is as a sysadmin, so they are sort of relevant.

[malvolio]

If they've specified a number of hours a day, then it's not a daily rate, is it? What happens if you don't work 7.5 hours a day? I'll give good odds you won't get overtime...

Really, hours of work, where they are irrelevant to the job in hand, are for permies, not contractors. You should permit an expectation of a number of hours a week, but avoid having it described contractually if possible (given the anality of many middle IT managers and HR teams, it often isn't. Doesn't make it right though - or even sensible)


Looking a little deeper, this whole hours thing is a result of how clients hire temporay resources. They can only think in terms of bums on seats, so your contract is usually costed as 90 days of effort at so much per day, regardless of how it makes it into the contract. The agencies also don't help, since they will only sell lumps of time, mostly because the poor dears don't understand the concept of project deliverables. If only the clients could drag themselves away from thinking that contractor hours are even vaguely related to permie hours in terms of costs and work done, we'd all be a lot better off.

[b0redom]

Sounds to me very much like you have detailed records so can show your BOSS that you have worked the EXPECTED 37.5 hrs per week.


Sounds to me that there is an awful lot of control of how you work there mind!!

Not at all. Some weeks I work more, some weeks I work less. We have a gentleman's agreement that I'll only bill for 37.5 hours / week, and on my days away from the office, I'll 'work from home'.

It's like a builder saying - I'll not be in on Friday, so I'll work a couple of hours extra on Monday - Thursday to get the work done.

[ft101]

Well i guess if you put it like that

My contract is daily rate for a set duration (start date to end date) with a number of hours per week and daily hours (7.5/37.5) specified. This is my first UK contract and we live and learn in any case. I understand this is convenient from a accounting and billing point of view.

I guess i'm not confused after all ?!?!

[NotAllThere]

My contracts simply specify the daily or hourly rate. There's a total number of days on the purchase order. I do a mixture of projects and support. I tend to do a couple of days with one client and the rest with another. So long as I get the job done, and they know when I'm going to be available, there are no issues.

If they know that they'll need me for a specific day, or set of days, they just ask if I'm available, or if I can make myself available. Conversely, if I know I won't be available on some days, I give them as much notice as I can. I try to arrange my vacations to mutually convenient times.

Occasionally I get calls, even when I've said I won't be in the office asking if I can come in to sort out something urgently.

Why would there be a need to specify availability in the contract?

[malvolio]

Not at all. You are providing a service. How you charge for it is simply an accounting convenience. Even if you are providing a service, you either add up all the hours you work and charge that number times a given rate, or you assume for each day you do some work for the client you will charge them a set amount. As long as the client isn't asking what he got for his money, hourly or daily is irrelevant (and if they are, you're in trouble anyway for being unprofessional).

Of course, on a day rate you charge the same whether you work one hour or 23 hours out of 24. If routinely working long days is likely to be an issue for you, and assuming your day rate is not covering already the additional workload, then go for an hourly rate.

[ft101]

I never fully understood this concept of a daily rate where there is no specific project deliverable or in other words, where the deliverable is a service or function.

If a person is providing a service, say a Sys Admin or similar, then they are surely providing man hours and skills, no? Therefore it is surely reasonable to specify times and duration that the services should be available for.

For a developer, its slightly different in that the remit is more project or deliverable based, but even then unless the developer is working in isolation (rare) then its reasonable to apply some expectation of availability.

I'm new to all this, but to me it seems that paying a daily (or hourly) rate and not specifying availability is contradictory?

[Billy Pilgrim]

Talk to your boss about time off in lieu? I keep an exact record of hours I work - my day rate says 7.5 hours / day. I usually acrue a couple of hours / week, which means days off in lieu.

If the revenue come calling, I have detailed records which prove I control when I work.

Sounds to me very much like you have detailed records so can show your BOSS that you have worked the EXPECTED 37.5 hrs per week.

Sounds to me that there is an awful lot of control of how you work there mind!!

Time in lieu is a permy concept -- SURELY !!

[b0redom]

Talk to your boss about time off in lieu? I keep an exact record of hours I work - my day rate says 7.5 hours / day. I usually acrue a couple of hours / week, which means days off in lieu.

If the revenue come calling, I have detailed records which prove I control when I work.

[dx4100]

Nothing wrong with you working a regular day - provided it's you that determines what it is. Equally, if you're in support for example, you would have to be there for the same hours as the users, whether you are perm or contractor, so that is also neutral in that it applies to everyone in that role.

Also, of course, it's not unreasonable for the client to expect a certain amount of work over the week in return for your charges. It's only if the contract states you will be there between given hours for no good business-related reason that it's a D&C issue.

Excellent...thanks for the advice

[malvolio]

Nothing wrong with you working a regular day - provided it's you that determines what it is. Equally, if you're in support for example, you would have to be there for the same hours as the users, whether you are perm or contractor, so that is also neutral in that it applies to everyone in that role.

Also, of course, it's not unreasonable for the client to expect a certain amount of work over the week in return for your charges. It's only if the contract states you will be there between given hours for no good business-related reason that it's a D&C issue.

[dx4100]

I had a client with a requirement that I be in the office a set number of hours. When I pointed out that if I don't have work to do, I'm not going to hang around the office charging for being present, and that this would save them money, they soon dropped the requirement.

I think the requirement that "the work gets done" is covered by "officious bystander"; it's pretty obvious that it's a requirement, otherwise why would they hire you?

Yeah I see your point....

They do actually trust me to do the work... They are just dotting i's and crossing the t's....

Ok swapping this on its head....

If there wasn’t anything in the contract about this and I actually did 7.5 hours a day and 37.5 hours a week...every week....would I get done on the working practices side....or is it now become a weak argument on the HMRC side ?

I actually prefer to work a structured working week as it makes sure I get my sorry arse out of bed and puts a bit of routine into my week...(although in reality I sometimes don’t start till 11am and work from home etc )... This isn’t just me trying to avoid IR35...its actually how i prefer to work

Its funny all these issue over control...when in fact the HMRC are controlling me more than the client could ever control me

[NotAllThere]

I had a client with a requirement that I be in the office a set number of hours. When I pointed out that if I don't have work to do, I'm not going to hang around the office charging for being present, and that this would save them money, they soon dropped the requirement.

I think the requirement that "the work gets done" is covered by "officious bystander"; it's pretty obvious that it's a requirement, otherwise why would they hire you?

[dx4100]

It's not good, but it's not fatal. After all, you're supposed to be delivering things, not supplying manpower.

You could try to lose the 7.5 hour day requirement, unless you're doing something that requires close contact with the business or your co-workers to do the job - in which case it's justified and neutral wrt IR35.

I can easily get them to drop the 7.5 hour a day requirement. The 37.5 a week requirement would be harder. Do you think the weekly time required is safer ?

They basically want to make sure stuff is being done....which is understandable.... I also cant do the projects they want unless I have access to there staff for requirement gathering etc... So I do need to work somewhat closely with the client....

[malvolio]

It's not good, but it's not fatal. After all, you're supposed to be delivering things, not supplying manpower.

You could try to lose the 7.5 hour day requirement, unless you're doing something that requires close contact with the business or your co-workers to do the job - in which case it's justified and neutral wrt IR35.