• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Dave Chaplin on LinkedIn"

Collapse

  • JohntheBike
    replied
    Originally posted by Invisiblehand View Post
    He views himself as King of the Contractors when all he's actually doing is shameless self promotion and whipping up a frenzy so he can flog his products.
    whipping up a frenzy
    only the gullible would so succumb. However, given his FOI campaign, I would say he's having more of an effect on the issues that IPSE is, who have claimed for many years that they are influencing the issues, without providing a scrap of evidence to support that claim.

    Leave a comment:


  • Invisiblehand
    replied
    Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
    He is in contact with people on the ground. Perhaps he is being fed opinions and incorrect information. I know he's been given what appears to be incorrect information about my client. I'm trying to establish what the reality is. I should know by some time next week.
    He views himself as King of the Contractors when all he's actually doing is shameless self promotion and whipping up a frenzy so he can flog his products.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohntheBike
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    It's not about being confrontational, I have no issue with that at all and I applaud that aspect of his work. It's about spreading misinformation that I have issue with because he sees something, decides 2 + 2 = 5 and will publish that conclusion without fact checking. That scares people into doing silly things as the majority don't fact check what they see, they accept it at face value. When you find out you've been misled, you start to wonder whose side he's on.
    He is in contact with people on the ground. Perhaps he is being fed opinions and incorrect information. I know he's been given what appears to be incorrect information about my client. I'm trying to establish what the reality is. I should know by some time next week.

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
    for all his faults, with his FOI requests, he has published more information than IPSE ever did. He doesn't have to maintain a seat at the table, so he can be as confrontational as he pleases.
    It's not about being confrontational, I have no issue with that at all and I applaud that aspect of his work. It's about spreading misinformation that I have issue with because he sees something, decides 2 + 2 = 5 and will publish that conclusion without fact checking. That scares people into doing silly things as the majority don't fact check what they see, they accept it at face value. When you find out you've been misled, you start to wonder whose side he's on.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
    for all his faults, with his FOI requests, he has published more information than IPSE ever did. He doesn't have to maintain a seat at the table, so he can be as confrontational as he pleases.
    I'd agree with this and can't deny his done some great work and more than some people/groups who's responsibility it was.

    I do have to agree with his scaremongering to some though. I had a couple of guys at my last gig watching April 2020 unfold via Daves posts and they were in a proper state. I had to spend a bit of time explaining the situation and pointing them at other resources to get a more balanced picture. Once they'd got the hang both of them decided to ukfollow him as it was causing them more angst than help. I've considered doing the same myself but he does come up with some great nuggets.

    To be fair to him though it's almost impossible for him to do the work he's done without digging in to nitty gritty which won't be good reading for some. It comes with the territory so I dont think he can be blamed or change things if he wants the same outcome.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohntheBike
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    But he does the cause no good when he stirs up a load of angst over not understanding the aspects of employment law he's cherry picking to substantiate his claims. I fell for it initially and swiftly had to edit a load of stuff to stop spreading misinformation.

    At least IPSE, for their many faults, will fact check first.

    He comes across as scaremongering when he makes these basic mistakes and is proven wrong so ends up doing more damage than good.

    Of course, as his end game is insurance sales then it's a very very good tactic.
    for all his faults, with his FOI requests, he has published more information than IPSE ever did. He doesn't have to maintain a seat at the table, so he can be as confrontational as he pleases.

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
    he is still trying and may be making more headway than IPSE ever did or are ever likely to. Sometimes, these issues take some time to bear fruit.
    But he does the cause no good when he stirs up a load of angst over not understanding the aspects of employment law he's cherry picking to substantiate his claims. I fell for it initially and swiftly had to edit a load of stuff to stop spreading misinformation.

    At least IPSE, for their many faults, will fact check first.

    He comes across as scaremongering when he makes these basic mistakes and is proven wrong so ends up doing more damage than good.

    Of course, as his end game is insurance sales then it's a very very good tactic.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohntheBike
    replied
    Originally posted by Invisiblehand View Post
    I'm still waiting for Chaplin to "Knock this one out of the park" as he said he would when the off payroll rules were announced.
    he is still trying and may be making more headway than IPSE ever did or are ever likely to. Sometimes, these issues take some time to bear fruit.

    Leave a comment:


  • Invisiblehand
    replied
    I'm still waiting for Chaplin to "Knock this one out of the park" as he said he would when the off payroll rules were announced.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohntheBike
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    As usual.
    your own assessment indicated to me that the market might level out in future. So I'm guessing that your opinion is correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
    possibly at the moment, but who knows in the long term. If clients begin to suffer from the commercial reality of not being able to source the expertise they require, would they then begin to create more B2B roles outside of IR35? Some here seem to think the market will level out at some point, which I guess may have some validity.
    As usual.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohntheBike
    replied
    Originally posted by CheeseSlice View Post
    Yes, but if the 9% figure I saw this week is true, thats a rather big dent in the sales pipeline.



    one of those 9%, good for you
    possibly at the moment, but who knows in the long term. If clients begin to suffer from the commercial reality of not being able to source the expertise they require, would they then begin to create more B2B roles outside of IR35? Some here seem to think the market will level out at some point, which I guess may have some validity.

    Leave a comment:


  • CheeseSlice
    replied
    Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
    surely there would still be a market, albeit reduced, for those contractors who are working outside of IR35?
    Yes, but if the 9% figure I saw this week is true, thats a rather big dent in the sales pipeline.

    Originally posted by Peoplesoft bloke View Post
    I am.
    one of those 9%, good for you

    Leave a comment:


  • eatenrifles
    replied
    Originally posted by AR Tax View Post
    Thanks for sharing my response.
    Thanks for posting it. So much information flying around, it doesn't help when things like this start creating panic and uncertainty around an issue that already has enough of both.

    Leave a comment:


  • AR Tax
    replied
    Thanks for sharing my response.

    The employment manual being referred to relates to employers hiring self employed sole traders (it does not relate to limited company contractors).
    Originally posted by eatenrifles View Post
    AR Tax Accountants on LinkedIn: #ir35 | 10 comments

    AR Tax Accountants shared this in response. Looks like Chaplin goofed.
    Sent from my SM-G950F using Contractor UK Forum mobile app

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X