Client policy agreement

[JoJoGabor]

Yeah contract reviewed, but as we all know it's workin practices that count

yes PCG plus member to cover legal costs of IR35, in fact it's reading some of theinfo on PCG that has got me paranoid!

[northernladuk]

Ok thanks for the advice all. This contract is probably the closets I've come to being within IR35 so being uber-careful

Have you had it checked by QDOS? Keeping contracts in closets isn't going to help your IR35 status either I am afraid.

[v8gaz]

Well, join PCG if not already a member, and relax.

[JoJoGabor]

Ok thanks for the advice all.

[northernladuk]

I think we are in danger of forgetting that the line manager/HR just want to get on with the next job. If you amend documents they usually do not have the authority to approve changes that have not been passed by Legal. You may think you are doing the right thing but if they have 5 other contractors who have accepted without fuss you then become a pain in the butt.

The advice given earlier in this thread is good. Policies are generically applied to employees and contractors(sometimes even just to casual site visitors). They are very unlikely to have a bearing on your main contractual relationship with the end user so don't fret and draw unnecessary attention to yourself.

Nicely put. Some +ve for that man.

[Taita]

So adding a sentence along the lines of " where the term employee has been used in these policies, this is understood to include external consultants, and does not affect the working relationship as defined in the services contract between the company and the services provider, signed YourfavouriteContractor" .... Should suffice in your opinion.

I think we are in danger of forgetting that the line manager/HR just want to get on with the next job. If you amend documents they usually do not have the authority to approve changes that have not been passed by Legal. You may think you are doing the right thing but if they have 5 other contractors who have accepted without fuss you then become a pain in the butt.

The advice given earlier in this thread is good. Policies are generically applied to employees and contractors(sometimes even just to casual site visitors). They are very unlikely to have a bearing on your main contractual relationship with the end user so don't fret and draw unnecessary attention to yourself.

[JamJarST]

So adding a sentence along the lines of " where the term employee has been used in these policies, this is understood to include external consultants, and does not affect the working relationship as defined in the services contract between the company and the services provider, signed YourfavouriteContractor" .... Should suffice in your opinion.

Is a representative of the ClientCo going to sign this amendment?

[JoJoGabor]

So adding a sentence along the lines of " where the term employee has been used in these policies, this is understood to include external consultants, and does not affect the working relationship as defined in the services contract between the company and the services provider, signed YourfavouriteContractor" .... Should suffice in your opinion.

[pmeswani]

In my view.... Employees can be taken to be Permies and Contractors who provide services to the said company. Employees tends to be used to reduce the need to say Employees / Contractors a few hundred times. Take it as read that Contractors are covered under this banner for the purpose of policy, and not contractual requirements which governs what work you do.

[northernladuk]

I can't see that it makes much difference bar a typo error on the clients part becuase they don't have another version. Also changing wording in a document and the signing it doesn't sound very official. Doesn't the change have to be countersigned by the client to be recognised anyway?

There doesn't seem to be any reason not to do that but I can't see why either. You (whoever you are) are agreeing to abide by the policies. It isn't direction or control or anything so the fact it incorrectly names you doesn't seem to make a difference.

I would be interested to see if an HR bod can tell me otherwise though.

[Support Monkey]

when ever i have received similar documents i always cross out the word employee and write contractor and initial it, then when i sign i write contractor next to my name, again no idea if this realy matters but at least i am making an effort to show i am a contractor

[JoJoGabor]

I'm not refusing to sign, just want to make reference to understanding the meaning of the policy but want to be careful around their wording referring to me as an employee throughout the docs. The one doc that is a contractors policy asks me to agree to the working time directive which I will be crossing out.

[northernladuk]

Signing policy documents does not affect your IR35. Anyone on site is obliged to understand and follow H&S policies, security policies etc. You are in no position to dictate to your client what you will and won't adhere to. You either adhere to it or you walk.

Policies are not control they are for legal and safety reasons.

There are of course some exceptions to this but you have to use a bit of bloody common sense when carrying out your duties.

Is't it funny by trying to act like a company and be out of IR35 people can show how badly they understand how a company works.... if you get my meaning....

[JoJoGabor]

Just been given a load of policy documents aimed at employees and been asked to sign a declaration saying:

I confirm I have read and fully understand the above policies. I confirm I will adhere to or apply the principles of the controls and guidelines documented within the policies above.

I am keen to reword this to avoid any suggestion at control, does anyone have a suitable blurb to replace it with?