Reply to: Well, here I am...

[SimonMac]

• If FCSA member umbrella practices are not illegal but are disingenuous or exploitative of contractors, where will you be naming and shaming these members?

I think that last question might not be apprioiate for Chris to answer, his organisation is aimed at Umbellas companies not the contractor so its somewhat unfair to ask him to comment on a situation that doesn't affect his members.

[Fred Bloggs]

I hope that through this forum platform you will openly enter into dialogue with me as you have with others.

Myself, I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

[Contractor Voice]

Hi Chris,

You courageously put yourself on this platform with, I believe, good intentions. I hope you haven’t been chased away by critics as if that were the case, we’ll have collectively lost the opportunity to engage in sincere dialogue.

I am sure you will have seen the new article published on my Contractor Voice, regarding the behaviour of JSA, a member of the FCSA, in relation to withholding Holiday pay. Click here if you have not.

I would genuinely welcome your response to the following questions in relation to it. They are:

1. Do you agree that JSA made false statements to ContractorUK and ComputerWeekly.com?
2. Why has JSA’s membership not been put on hold pending the outcome of your investigation?
3. Will you be postponing JSAs FCSA renewal due on 31st March 2022 whilst the investigation continues?
4. Will the investigation be conducted by wholly independent professionals?
5. Which business(s) was used for the audit that enabled JSA’s membership of the FCSA and condoned their use of Holiday Pay?
6. Will you still be going ahead with the hotline for reporting bad umbrella practices given current PR challenges?
7. Will you be reporting JSA, Churchill Knight or any other FCSA members to HMRC yourself?
8. If FCSA member umbrella practices are not illegal but are disingenuous or exploitative of contractors, where will you be naming and shaming these members?

I hope that through this forum platform you will openly enter into dialogue with me as you have with others.

[Contractor Voice]

It will certainly be interesting to see what the FCSA's findings are following their investigation of JSA/Workwell. The whole sector is going to be watching closely, awaiting their decision.

[eek]

Well that must count as a result. Let's hope the reaction is to follow the Ts&Cs rather than simply leave the FCSA...

See post 13 - all the years of advertising means that for most end clients - FCSA membership is a requirement because they've been continually told it meant their contractors were honestly and fully paid. So JSA won't be leaving the FCSA unless they are completely chucked out.

[malvolio]

We actually have an answer https://www.contractoruk.com/news/00...jsa_group.html

Chris is changing the "woolly" terms

Well that must count as a result. Let's hope the reaction is to follow the Ts&Cs rather than simply leave the FCSA...

[eek]

OK, fair enough. Let's await the (or an) answer with interest!

We actually have an answer https://www.contractoruk.com/news/00...jsa_group.html

Chris is changing the "woolly" terms

[malvolio]

I did in post 11.

You then have post 12 where Chris is asking me to do his job for him when MUC fraud doesn't hurt contractors (once the umbrella submits an RTI file and the RTI file matches Agency Reporting - it's job done).




Permanent pay works very differently - you are paid a fixed salary on a use it or lose it basis for holiday pay. A contractor gets a daily rate - if some of that isn't paid to the contractor they are losing out. Yep tax is a possible issue but only because income that isn't paid out to the contractor is taxable profit (so it makes sense not to hold on to it after holiday year end).

But think about it -

As an employee on a salary of £50,000 with 33 days holiday - if I only take 30 days holiday the employer shouldn't need to find extra money to pay for my 3 days of unused holiday - and if they are it's more overtime than anything else.

As a contractor on £500 a day - the umbrella deducts 12.07% to cover holiday pay. it's a reverse calculation so comes to £47 or so. That £47 comes from work the contractor does so should really be coming back to the contractor at some point...

And the problem is a simple one - on November 1st 2020 - JSA treated all unclaimed holiday pay as JSA income / profit. FCSA's viewpoint of that is that it's historic, no breach of their rules.

The question then becomes - the new code of conduct applies from October 2021. So what did JSA / Workwell do on 1st November 2021?

OK, fair enough. Let's await the (or an) answer with interest!

[eek]

And to be fair, you haven't responded to the points raised further to post 8 either.

I did in post 11.

You then have post 12 where Chris is asking me to do his job for him when MUC fraud doesn't hurt contractors (once the umbrella submits an RTI file and the RTI file matches Agency Reporting - it's job done).

Anyway I may be out of date on the rules, but as I recall, permie holiday pay basically (there are minor exceptions) doesn't cross financial years without incurring a taxation issue. I can't see it would be any different for umbrella users. Is the problem in part that the umbrellas aren't telling their users that the user needs to do something about unused holiday pay in time for that to be effective, be that year end or termination?

Permanent pay works very differently - you are paid a fixed salary on a use it or lose it basis for holiday pay. A contractor gets a daily rate - if some of that isn't paid to the contractor they are losing out. Yep tax is a possible issue but only because income that isn't paid out to the contractor is taxable profit (so it makes sense not to hold on to it after holiday year end).

But think about it -

As an employee on a salary of £50,000 with 33 days holiday - if I only take 30 days holiday the employer shouldn't need to find extra money to pay for my 3 days of unused holiday - and if they are it's more overtime than anything else.

As a contractor on £500 a day - the umbrella deducts 12.07% to cover holiday pay. it's a reverse calculation so comes to £47 or so. That £47 comes from work the contractor does so should really be coming back to the contractor at some point...

And the problem is a simple one - on November 1st 2020 - JSA treated all unclaimed holiday pay as JSA income / profit. FCSA's viewpoint of that is that it's historic, no breach of their rules.

The question then becomes - the new code of conduct applies from October 2021. So what did JSA / Workwell do on 1st November 2021?

[malvolio]

Post 8 is completely unanswered - however, as both Chris and I know the answer to the question and it leaves Chris in a very awkward position I'm not surprised he stopped responding. (Hint post 6 isn't correct because Chris and Philip READ the code of conduct but didn't think about it)...

If you were watching F1 yesterday you would note that there was a comment where it was said Adrian Newry reads the Rulebook not to see what is in it but to see the gaps within it that you can play with...

And to be fair, you haven't responded to the points raised further to post 8 either.

Anyway I may be out of date on the rules, but as I recall, permie holiday pay basically (there are minor exceptions) doesn't cross financial years without incurring a taxation issue. I can't see it would be any different for umbrella users. Is the problem in part that the umbrellas aren't telling their users that the user needs to do something about unused holiday pay in time for that to be effective, be that year end or termination?

[eek]

To be fair, apart from some veiled abuse, there's not really been much to answer to...

Post 8 is completely unanswered - however, as both Chris and I know the answer to the question and it leaves Chris in a very awkward position I'm not surprised he stopped responding. (Hint post 6 isn't correct because Chris and Philip READ the code of conduct but didn't think about it)...

If you were watching F1 yesterday you would note that there was a comment where it was said Adrian Newry reads the Rulebook not to see what is in it but to see the gaps within it that you can play with...

[Fred Bloggs]

To be fair, when your opening post contains "Yes, that Chris Bryce.", you are probably asking for a kicking.

True to form would be my personal experience.

[jamesbrown]

To be fair, apart from some veiled abuse, there's not really been much to answer to...

To be fair, when your opening post contains "Yes, that Chris Bryce.", you are probably asking for a kicking.

[malvolio]

I think you've scared him off, makes a big show of joining and then is never seen again

To be fair, apart from some veiled abuse, there's not really been much to answer to...

[SimonMac]

I think you've scared him off, makes a big show of joining and then is never seen again