Reply to: Opt out of Conduct of employment agencies 2003 act?

[northernladuk]

I’ve never met with anyone at client

Introduced doesn't necessarily mean meeting. It could be argued it's being presented to them via CV. The client knowing who you are could be enough.

[PerfectStorm]

Before or after being introduced to the client?

I’ve never met with anyone at client

[eek]

Now being asked by one agency to opt out of 2003 regs for Inside work ("because the client has asked that we don't put anyone forward who hasn't so that they don't start demanding employee rights") - is this a thing anyone's encountered?

Or is agency just trying to make sure they're don't have a duty to pay contractors and have restrictive covenants etc. as before?

Before or after being introduced to the client?

[SueEllen]

Now being asked by one agency to opt out of 2003 regs for Inside work ("because the client has asked that we don't put anyone forward who hasn't so that they don't start demanding employee rights") - is this a thing anyone's encountered?

Or is agency just trying to make sure they're don't have a duty to pay contractors and have restrictive covenants etc. as before?

It doesn't make any sense for them to ask you to do that that as you are controlled by the end client otherwise you wouldn't be working inside IR35.

It only makes sense for the umbrella or the agency side who are doing your pay roll to sign it.

[PerfectStorm]

Now being asked by one agency to opt out of 2003 regs for Inside work ("because the client has asked that we don't put anyone forward who hasn't so that they don't start demanding employee rights") - is this a thing anyone's encountered?

Or is agency just trying to make sure they're don't have a duty to pay contractors and have restrictive covenants etc. as before?

[SueEllen]

Another agency trying to force me to opt -out, I haven't opted out for the last 10 years and they claim (like all agencies) they never had a contractor who did not want to opt-out, to which I said I don't believe you, they even wrote this in the contract:

If the company contractor and its consultant do not opt out of the Conduct Regulations, this may be deemed to compromise their tax status under
IR35, i.e. it may increase the chances of an assignment falling within IR35. This is for the following reasons:
o the Conduct Regulations provide quasi-employment protection to contractors; and
o the Conduct Regulations state that the services provided by are to find assignments where the contractor acts for
and "under the control" of the client. The concept of "control" is an employment indicator. When assessing whether or not an assignment
falls within IR35, HM Revenue & Customs looks for employment indicators.

[Eirikur]

That gibberish is in the contract?

Yes I found it quite unbelievable as well

[eek]

Another agency trying to force me to opt -out, I haven't opted out for the last 10 years and they claim (like all agencies) they never had a contractor who did not want to opt-out, to which I said I don't believe you, they even wrote this in the contract:

If the company contractor and its consultant do not opt out of the Conduct Regulations, this may be deemed to compromise their tax status under
IR35, i.e. it may increase the chances of an assignment falling within IR35. This is for the following reasons:
o the Conduct Regulations provide quasi-employment protection to contractors; and
o the Conduct Regulations state that the services provided by are to find assignments where the contractor acts for
and "under the control" of the client. The concept of "control" is an employment indicator. When assessing whether or not an assignment
falls within IR35, HM Revenue & Customs looks for employment indicators.

That gibberish is in the contract?

[Eirikur]

Another agency trying to force me to opt -out, I haven't opted out for the last 10 years and they claim (like all agencies) they never had a contractor who did not want to opt-out, to which I said I don't believe you, they even wrote this in the contract:

If the company contractor and its consultant do not opt out of the Conduct Regulations, this may be deemed to compromise their tax status under
IR35, i.e. it may increase the chances of an assignment falling within IR35. This is for the following reasons:
o the Conduct Regulations provide quasi-employment protection to contractors; and
o the Conduct Regulations state that the services provided by <ABC Agency> are to find assignments where the contractor acts for
and "under the control" of the client. The concept of "control" is an employment indicator. When assessing whether or not an assignment
falls within IR35, HM Revenue & Customs looks for employment indicators.

[css_jay99]

The opt out was designed to add financial risk to show you were utterly outside(WTT today referenced it as a 4th pillar in determining status but i wouldn’t go that far)

however for an inside contract you (and sane umbrellas) would prefer that agencies had to pay even if the end client doesn’t

so my advice would be to not opt out (oh I can see an argument coming when people discover what’s about to happen)

I excluded the out-out form.

[eek]

The opt out was designed to add financial risk to show you were utterly outside(WTT today referenced it as a 4th pillar in determining status but i wouldn’t go that far)

however for an inside contract you (and sane umbrellas) would prefer that agencies had to pay even if the end client doesn’t

so my advice would be to not opt out (oh I can see an argument coming when people discover what’s about to happen)

[css_jay99]

wow 660 replies.

Just going through documents from agency for an inside IR35 contract and came across the out out document to either sign or disregard. Agency handles (I think) all employment by the client so unlikely they will do something the client is not aware of or instigated.

Just gone through the last 10 pages and I am still confused.

In summary, Don't sign opt-out form and see if agency tries to force me?

[MrC]

Like I said, the agency has f*** all idea of the laws that govern their business.

You are not wrong. When i spoke to their "compliance manager" on the phone they said that this act was all to do with a marketing/GDPR type opt out. Unbelievable!

[malvolio]

Well, this is what the agency seem to be attempting via the contract and it's on their payroll. I wonder if this clause is a copy-paste hangover from old outisde IR35 contracts.

Like I said, the agency has f*** all idea of the laws that govern their business.

[MrC]

You can't opt out if you are on agency payroll - a third party is required within the contractual relationship for an opt out to be legally offered.

Well, this is what the agency seem to be attempting via the contract and it's on their payroll. I wonder if this clause is a copy-paste hangover from old outisde IR35 contracts.