Reply to: FTCs: the future of contracting?

[LondonManc]

That's how you can get yourself to Employment Tribunal. FTC has employment rights and someone doing the same job as FTC may raise a complaint about wage discrimination.

These rights don't have to be the same as employees - a lot of rights don't kick in until after two years. At least this is a hard stop so they know they then have to offer you something different or bin you off.

[LondonManc]

I've definitely seen more FTC roles come up in the last month or two. The HR department at my last client thought FTC was most likely the long term 'solution' to IR35 for them. Not sure about that but I saw one recently for a three year fixed term Head of IT which seemed ridiculous.

Totally agree with them. Takes determination out of the equation and removes ambiguity of how you should be treated. If there's an assessment done of Outside = Outside, Inside = FTC then at least they've acknowledged it. The benefit for you is that you're not having to take the umbrella fees and risks into account.

[jayn200]

I know this is an old thread resurrected, but I'd add that I've taken a couple of FTCs in the past; if the pay and benefits are right, good company for the CV and good experience/work then why not? In both cases my pay + benefits pre tax was not far off my ltd contract rates. Both 12 months in length. I enjoyed one more than the other but hey, who enjoys every contract they work on anyway?

Not for everyone, but has worked fine for me

I did one as well when I was quite junior. As long as net pay is where I need it to be and there is an end date.

Problem is when you get to a mid career and higher the FTCs just don't come close anymore but maybe that will change. Maybe we will start seeing six figure FTCs, I just don't think they're very common.

[jamesbrown]

I know this is an old thread resurrected, but I'd add that I've taken a couple of FTCs in the past; if the pay and benefits are right, good company for the CV and good experience/work then why not? In both cases my pay + benefits pre tax was not far off my ltd contract rates. Both 12 months in length. I enjoyed one more than the other but hey, who enjoys every contract they work on anyway?

Not for everyone, but has worked fine for me

Likewise, I had a couple of FTCs when I started out working for unis - pretty standard engagement for research staff. It's like any other type of job - if both parties are happy with the arrangement, no problem. It's when one party wants something different (e.g., to be a permie) that things don't work.

[Whorty]

I know this is an old thread resurrected, but I'd add that I've taken a couple of FTCs in the past; if the pay and benefits are right, good company for the CV and good experience/work then why not? In both cases my pay + benefits pre tax was not far off my ltd contract rates. Both 12 months in length. I enjoyed one more than the other but hey, who enjoys every contract they work on anyway?

Not for everyone, but has worked fine for me

[elsergiovolador]

Except that (under the new rules) the company has to take reasonable care... i.e. individual determinations. An agency FTC / Umbrella side steps that risk.

M

Yes you have to, but that is just a formality. If you have a contract written for a specific role, then you only do assessment for that role - there is no room for individual determination and this is permitted by HMRC. If you create a contract with the points I listed earlier, that is enough for it to be inside and meet reasonable care. It is much less risk than FTC / Umbrella.

[GhostofTarbera]

Except that (under the new rules) the company has to take reasonable care... i.e. individual determinations. An agency FTC / Umbrella side steps that risk.

M

Indeed why would they take even a small risk


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[mjcp]

there is no penalty for declaring someone inside.

Except that (under the new rules) the company has to take reasonable care... i.e. individual determinations. An agency FTC / Umbrella side steps that risk.

M

[elsergiovolador]

But your comparator is another person at the agency, not the end client, so they would be on the same terms or not doing the same job.

M

It may or may not be. I am only saying that "inside IR35" is the safest option, because company doesn't need to worry about employment rights or wrong status determination as there is no penalty for declaring someone inside.

[mjcp]

That's how you can get yourself to Employment Tribunal. FTC has employment rights and someone doing the same job as FTC may raise a complaint about wage discrimination.

But your comparator is another person at the agency, not the end client, so they would be on the same terms or not doing the same job.

M

[mjcp]

Good luck with that.

There are some and I have been contacted with others more recently:

Large global IT s/w company stopped all UK contracts in Jan (due to IR35) and switch them to same rate but via an agency PAYE arrangement. (some left, some stayed)

So, I'm an employee* of an agency, on a contractor rate**, with a FTC.

*Complete with 1 month notice, 3% pension, holiday etc etc (funded by ** below)
**analogous with an Umbrella model for net, holiday etc

Its not as good as traditional contracting, but its better than perm in the current market! I can see it being a popular choice in the future too.

M

[elsergiovolador]

Ah, you're missing my point - these FTC gigs would be at traditional contract rates (using the standard contract calculator perhaps).

That's how you can get yourself to Employment Tribunal. FTC has employment rights and someone doing the same job as FTC may raise a complaint about wage discrimination.

[elsergiovolador]

You don't have to worry about IR35 if you declare someone inside. There is no penalty for wrong inside determination.

You only need a couple of things in the contract to ensure is not going to be appealed, for example no right to substitute and a that the work will be done by named person only.

Even if there is appeal, you can just terminate the contract or re-iterate why it is inside from the beginning.

[edison]

I've definitely seen more FTC roles come up in the last month or two. The HR department at my last client thought FTC was most likely the long term 'solution' to IR35 for them. Not sure about that but I saw one recently for a three year fixed term Head of IT which seemed ridiculous.

[GigiBronz]

My humble opinion is that you are wasting your time here.
Ir35 was step 1, carving out alternative employment methods. Step 2 will be loosening employment rights. And you have a new employment model that greatly benefits the employer.
On the side, paid health insurance will creep in and the points based immigration system will enable access to resources across the globe.
Welcome to capitalism 2.0. Will we be better off? Considering the imbalance in a negotiation between the two parties, I would think not.
To answer you question, we will be most likely all on FTC’s but without stipulated end date. All we can do is adapt.