Reply to: Why aren't you in the PCG then?

[Epiphone]

Mal: you might want to check my post in the member forum reflecting on my first year of membership.

[lilelvis2000]

There are no benefits to me. Perhaps the IR35 insurance would be handy. other than that I can't think of a single thing.

Until the day comes when IT people need to be accredited by a chartered organisation (a college if you like) there is no point in me being a part of it. I don't join the BCS because it charges a huge joining fee which I don't agree with (I don't join gyms who charge joining fees either). There are no benefits to joining the BCS for me either.

As well, I'm scottish-born so parting with cash is always difficult.

[The Lone Gunman]

I had this conversation with Malvolio before. We agreed.

You need to ignore all the bad stuff for now OK.
What the PCG offers is very similar to a Union or representative body. You get to join a club with others who share common interests and problems. You get access to experts and others who may have experience of problems you have yet to face. You get access to advice that is either not available elsewhere or is very expensive elsewhere.

200 quid (or there abouts) is peanuts for this kind of membership (anybody know what Union fees are these days).

Also. The PAYE and IR35 investigation cover is worth the membership fee alone, particularly if you cop for an investigation.

All in all it is a no brainer.

Long term readers of this board will know that I am no friend of the PCG so it may surprise you to know that I am a member.

[Lewis]

If I could pay a nomial sum(say £20 per year) to join forums then I would.

Me too. I have QDOS insurance so no point paying for same thing twice, but would be interested in other benefits (e.g. forum, documents etc..).

[LGDT]

Interesting thread.

I was one of the original 200 that stumped up £100 when Andy White first spotted the obscure press release IR35 that accompanied the 1999 Budget and raised the alarm.

I ‘ve been ever present since then but never held, or been tempted to hold any representative position, so I write now as a grunt member with no particular axe to grind.

What Malvolio postulated is certainly correct. IR35 as first laid out in that initial press release and accompanying notes would have resulted in a CIS type scheme of certification, run by the recruitment agencies that would have effectively killed contracting as we know it. It was mainly due to lobbying by Andy White and the PCG’s earliest incarnation that we at least got the “concession” of the self-employed tests that now underpin IR35

With regard to insurances and discounts. All I would say is look around. You don’t have to buy everything the PCG offers. Take a pick and mix approach. FWIW I have PCG Plus which gives me peace of mind on my tax affairs, corporate and personal. I buy my indemnity insurance elsewhere because it’s cheaper. There’s a big free market out there. You’re all part of it so use it.

I disagree with the hierarchy on certain issues. I don’t believe we should be offering umbrella services as I feel this undermines our central purpose. I think we should be more aggressive than we have been on employment rights for IR35-caught contractors. And I feel there are too many on the CC who look down a little on the average BOS contractor. I would also agree that the front page for non-members is fairly hideous and hides a lot of the good stuff.

However, if I feel strongly enough, I can always stand for election and try and get things changed or at a lower level suggest changes via the forums. The fact that I don’t means that I guess I must be relatively happy with things as they are. What the PCG has given me is a kind of education on tax and government thinking on small business that, no matter how good they are, is unmatched by any other contractor website or organisation.

Look, no organisation is perfect and any representative organisation is never going to reflect every single one of your views. But the PCG is the best we’ve got for now and for £220 it’s still a no-brainer as far as I’m concerned.

[malvolio]

As one who once failed to find something on the site and therefore received the Mal "idiot" venom, I side with the poster. The site is appallingly difficult to navigate, and despite the impression that must be given by thousands of posts on CUK, we don't really have time to fart about with it. Navigation should be obvious to a user. And that last statement should be obvious to anyone in IT.

Actually I agree - my problem is that I know my way around it and where to look, so I admit to being a poor judge of how good it is. Part of the problem is that there is a huge amount on there but it's never really got catalogued properly, so the really useful things are all wrapped up with some of the more esoteric and historical ones. Adn of course the long-standing bug with the login process (an Andy White "special feature", aka crap core design) that randomly blocks your access doesn't really help matters and has to be sorted for once and all.

However, enough people have said the same thing as you that the site designers really need to take notice.

[Euro-commuter]

...It's all there, along with a dozen or so other similar links, but if you can't be arsed to go look...

As one who once failed to find something on the site and therefore received the Mal "idiot" venom, I side with the poster. The site is appallingly difficult to navigate, and despite the impression that must be given by thousands of posts on CUK, we don't really have time to fart about with it. Navigation should be obvious to a user. And that last statement should be obvious to anyone in IT.

[Euro-commuter]

...and assorted historical concerns about things that happened between two and six years ago that have actually been resolved.

I didn't mention that but it is a concern of mine. "concern" is the wrong word: it is not something that can be resolved, not without a time machine. Why on earth should we start afresh with out 220.00 as though it never happened? IMHO if you dismiss it as if it were fixed, you will be doing yourself a disservice by being mistaken.

[Board Game Geek]

Never been with the PCG, mainly because it became clear to me that for an organisation that purports to act as the mouth piece for the IT Industry, it doesnt seem to have done the industry much good.

I would quite happily pay £200 a year for an Organisation that would lobby Parliament relentlessly over FTV's etc and ensuring IT remains a well-paid and viable career within this country, and not something that can be outsourced to the cheapest bidder overseas.

However, looking at the state of the IT Industry in the UK, I can only conclude that the PCG are a "Paper Tiger".

[Pondlife]

My £0.02

I've never really been a big pusher of the PCG (as I have no vested interest) but I do recognise the fact that there is no other real voice for the one man band trying to compete and deal with the unfathomable legislation that we currently have. I am a member and joined through a recomendation on this site. I don't really post there (unlike the crap I do here) but the more serious forums are pertinent/relevant/professional (and moderated, so no CD etc). Add in trhe advice lines and the investigation cover, for the sake of about £200 (tax deductable) JFDI.

Don't really see the problem with it but am happy to be showm as an idiot.

[Old Greg]

What, like this (slightly censored) bit on the website you mean...



It's all there, along with a dozen or so other similar links, but if you can't be arsed to go look...

As I posted before, I give up.

[pisces]

Going to get QDOS, tax insurance instead.

[malvolio]

So, how many new members has this stunt of yours attracted then?

None. That wasn't the intention. I'm merely trying to find out why people don't join so we can do something about it. If I can summarise the first day's inputs...

So far, we've got poor communication of benefits, difficulty understanding how much you can actually save through membership discounts, difficult to read website, cheaper insurance available elsewhere, a lack of confidence that the PCG is actually driving any kind of agenda for change that will benefit contractors in general, a pile of elitist attitude issues and assorted historical concerns about things that happened between two and six years ago that have actually been resolved. Worryingly half of those problems are being reported by existing members. Have I missed any?

On Saturday, as part of my unpaid 14 hour day attending the CC meeting, I'll be leading a SIG focused on driving up membership, whch is why I want to understand what people see as the barriers. Rest assured all the comments made in this thread will be taken on board.

And apologies for being my usual rude and assertive self, but just for once that was intentional...

[DS23]

well, i did go and have another look or two.

but i remain distinctly underwhelmed by the whole thing. it is not blindingly obvious that i should join.

i'll take a risk with jury service. wouldn't mind a break anyway. i expect periods of inactivity - that's why i my company has reserves. the fringe benefits of documents and help and advice are yawn inspiring.

as others have mentioned the real turnoff is the fact that access to the competitive insurance (which might actually save my business some money and therefore be a blindingly obvious benefit) requires me to hand over 220 quid a year before i can see what my premiums will be. and since i am confident that the premiums plus membership fee will not save me any money why should i join?

the website and language used therein are do not endear me to the purpose of the group. too many of the t&c's contain clauses that can significantly reduce the benefits and i find the whole thing activates my intuition sensors. my intuition for pcg is "no".

[hugebrain]

What, like this (slightly censored) bit on the website you mean...

Premiums vary with turnover and start at £xxx (+ 5% IPT) for those in IT with turnover below £100,000 a year, while Premiums for Engineers and other non-IT contractors are higher and are based on personal quotes.

I think your attitude really sums up what I was trying to say about the PCG not being very nice. All those insults and then you censor the most important part of your quote. Maybe you should change the name too, if you are "professional contractors" why do your companies have such a low turnover?