Reply to: Mental Health Issues and Contracting

[Damon]

I have just read the 'Dressing Gown' thread and found some great insights to life on the bench...

Coincidently today a friend shared a video on Facebook which mentions 'Black Dog'....RC mentioned Black Dog very early in his thread....

Thought provoking:

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

Suppose I meant "good cause".

Not being able to fulfil the contract is the only cause a client needs to terminate with a supplier.

If YourCo has a single employee and is unable to work for whatever reason and YourCo cannot supply a suitable replacement (or is unable to contractually) then YourCo is unable to fulfil the contract. The reason why single employee is unable to work is not the client's concern (nor should it be), it's YourCo's problem.

If anything, it highlights the good business case for having a good unfettered substitution clause in your contracts regardless of IR35.

[petergriffin]

I thought that a mental health issue was a prerequisite for IT professionals. One should be able to turn their perceived bad qualities into good ones.

For example one with OCD, paranoia and schizoid personality would do great as an IT security person.

Pathological liars also excel as IT project managers or recruitment agents.

[SueEllen]

Clientco could argue that a breakdown of some sort, would render the contractor incapable of fulfilling the role.

Unlike a physical disablement, such as a broken arm, which may heal, a mental issue, such as depression, could recur.

There would also be the stigma attached.

A CV showing a 6-month gap due to some kind of recovery from a broken limb, is quite different from a 6-month gap due to clinical depression.

People can injure the same limb more than once within the same environment or trigger as the initial injury e.g. person who plays sport for years.

You can also injury a limb once and have one episode of mental illness e.g. postnatal depression, so it's a poor analogy.

If you had a 6 month gap for any reason - illness or otherwise you aren't going to tell an agent.

[SueEllen]

In my current engagement, direct with an insurance company, the contract contains this clause...

The company may at any time and without prejudice to any rights or claims it has against the consultant company by notice in writing, terminate this agreement... If the individual shall become of unsound mind, be or become a patient under any mental health legislation....

I've never seen that before in a contract.

Looks like it could breach:
1. Equality law as mentions individual worker.
2. Health and safety at work legislation if the client's work environment triggers the mental health problem then they have a liability.

That blanket statement is also daft as if someone suddenly found they were on the autistic spectrum but high functioning, according to how that clause is interpreted they could now be "of unsound mind".

There are ways of getting rid of people with illnesses and if they are contractors you can probably do it without breaking the law. Putting it in a contract leaves you open to very bad publicity if things go wrong.

[SueEllen]

I bet she was tired (and sore)

Just saw this.

The one who came back was in her 20s and had her mother helping her a lot, while the one who did the handover was in her 30s.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Clientco could argue that a breakdown of some sort, would render the contractor incapable of fulfilling the role.

Unlike a physical disablement, such as a broken arm, which may heal, a mental issue, such as depression, could recur.

There would also be the stigma attached.

A CV showing a 6-month gap due to some kind of recovery from a broken limb, is quite different from a 6-month gap due to clinical depression.

Does anyone know if Critical Illness Cover covers psychological disabilities?

I think it comes down to 'education' (i'm really looking for some alternative to 'enlightenment'). An awful lot of mental health issues are comparable to a broken arm, or some other physical illness. Once the correct medication is found and correctly balanced then there's no reason to view that person any differently, in many cases.

It just feels different because the idea of not being ourselves scares us so much.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Anyone, including employers, should be able to discriminate against anyone else for any reason, including age, sex, race, mental health, or whether they have an annoying accent.

It may not be rational to do so (discriminate according to some of those things, that is), but holding an imaginary moral high ground by using violence, via law enforcement, to enforce personal preferences & warm fluffy feelings is hypocritical at best.

So yes, employers should be allowed - business is all about trading value for value. No business (which is just people) owe anything to anyone else that is unearned.

[jmo21]

Suppose I meant "good cause".

They don't need that either.

[evilagent]

Clientco could argue that a breakdown of some sort, would render the contractor incapable of fulfilling the role.

Unlike a physical disablement, such as a broken arm, which may heal, a mental issue, such as depression, could recur.

There would also be the stigma attached.

A CV showing a 6-month gap due to some kind of recovery from a broken limb, is quite different from a 6-month gap due to clinical depression.

Does anyone know if Critical Illness Cover covers psychological disabilities?

[Cenobite]

They do not need to have a "good case".

They do not need to give a reason.

Suppose I meant "good cause".

[northernladuk]

But in my mind you are mixing two issues up there. One is a faceless company, the other is the person themselves. One is ok one is totally unacceptable.

Quite torn about this issue. If a contractor is in contract, then say has a problem related to a medical condition and can't work for the foreseeable, then as you're not a permie, then I can see the client has a good case for terminating the contract. I think that's what we sign up for as contractors so it's pretty harsh but fair especially if you claim to be outside IR35.

Faceless company situation. You take the person regardless of any gender, race etc nothing. You take on a supplier and their person. If their person can't deliver for whatever reason contract is terminated. It doesn't matter a hoot what is the matter with the person so zero discrimination. It's about delivery in a B2B contract pure and simple.

What troubles me more is when you don't get offered the contract in the first place because or your colour, gender, sexuality, if you have an obvious physical disability (especially when it doesn't affect your ability to do the job) or you've just come out and said at interview that you have some unseen condition. Unfortunately, you never find out if this was the case because you'll be told after the interview that you didn't get it for another more legitimate reason. I still think there needs to be protection against this whether you're a contractor or not.

This is personal discrimination which is totally different to the first example and is completely wrong. The person should be treated the same way whatever job he has or lifestyle he lives. This has nothing to do with business, permies or contractors. The laws should blanket cover any situation where this kind of discrimination occurs.

The only and only case where personal discrimination should be acceptable would be where the person is found to be the owner of the Suityou01 sockie in which case they can be refused work on that fact alone.

[jmo21]

then as you're not a permie, then I can see the client has a good case for terminating the contract.

They do not need to have a "good case".

They do not need to give a reason.

[JoJoGabor]

In my current engagement, direct with an insurance company, the contract contains this clause...

The company may at any time and without prejudice to any rights or claims it has against the consultant company by notice in writing, terminate this agreement... If the individual shall become of unsound mind, be or become a patient under any mental health legislation....

I've never seen that before in a contract.

[Cenobite]

Quite torn about this issue. If a contractor is in contract, then say has a problem related to a medical condition and can't work for the foreseeable, then as you're not a permie, then I can see the client has a good case for terminating the contract. I think that's what we sign up for as contractors so it's pretty harsh but fair especially if you claim to be outside IR35.

What troubles me more is when you don't get offered the contract in the first place because or your colour, gender, sexuality, if you have an obvious physical disability (especially when it doesn't affect your ability to do the job) or you've just come out and said at interview that you have some unseen condition. Unfortunately, you never find out if this was the case because you'll be told after the interview that you didn't get it for another more legitimate reason. I still think there needs to be protection against this whether you're a contractor or not.

It's a difficult one.