Public sector IR35 consultation launched

[eek]

                         Int    People
Government Departments   4      6
Public Sector            7     10

So they interviewed 6 people in 4 departments and expect that to be statistically accurate

They don't even seem to have spoken to the appropriate people in their own department who have been tasked in removing their dependencies on the larger outsourcing companies and how they are achieving those requirements...

[Fred Bloggs]

These days IPSE seems more concerned with collecting membership fees and distinguishing "freelancers of the year" - and other such silly, meaningless PR stuff.
When it comes to hard lobbying on core topics, in defense of the livelihood of its members, curiously IPSE seems nowhere to be found.

Happy to be proven wrong.

Not to mention developing partnership relationships involving non disclosed kick backs from possibly the UK's worst and certainly one of the most expensive contractor service providers.

[malvolio]

Not to mention developing partnership relationships involving non disclosed kick backs from possibly the UK's worst and certainly one of the most expensive contractor service providers.

There are 78 accountants on their supplier list and 16 umbrella services providers come to that. None is any more significant than any other. But if it makes you happy to sling accusations around, who am I to complain.

[eek]

There are 78 accountants on their supplier list and 16 umbrella services providers come to that. None is any more significant than any other. But if it makes you happy to sling accusations around, who am I to complain.

The IPSE don't send emails round promoting those 78 though. They have however sent emails selling the "virtues" of the one being talked about...

And my opinion of that particular firm is known both here and on IPSE....

[Fred Bloggs]

There are 78 accountants on their supplier list and 16 umbrella services providers come to that. None is any more significant than any other. But if it makes you happy to sling accusations around, who am I to complain.

Epic fail. There is only one partner firm. They must pay the most, but we'll never know because the question doesn't get answered.

[malvolio]

Epic fail. There is only one partner firm. They must pay the most, but we'll never know because the question doesn't get answered.

Have you asked? Or are you simply having a problem understanding commercial confidentiality? And the point that you have missed is that no members are required to use them, nor do they get promoted over any other of the potential suppliers.

But as I said, if it makes you happy to make pointless accusations, do carry on.

[eek]

Have you asked? Or are you simply having a problem understanding commercial confidentiality? And the point that you have missed is that no members are required to use them, nor do they get promoted over any other of the potential suppliers.

But as I said, if it makes you happy to make pointless accusations, do carry on.

Exactly what role or purpose do you serve in IPSE now? You have always been awfully good in mis (over) representing exactly what your relationship with IPSE is (to the annoyance of various IPSE board members I may add)...

And its clear on the IPSE forum that there is a commercial relationship between IPSE and said accountancy firm - terms that were confidential and therefore could not be discussed.....

[Fred Bloggs]

Have you asked? Or are you simply having a problem understanding commercial confidentiality? And the point that you have missed is that no members are required to use them, nor do they get promoted over any other of the potential suppliers.

But as I said, if it makes you happy to make pointless accusations, do carry on.

1 Yes, I have asked.
2 No, I understand confidentiality but in a member owned (effectively a) cooperative, the management should feel they can share any information with members when requested in a member only area. Indeed, they should be bound to in the interest of total transparency.
3 Correct. I wonder how many members use them? I wonder how many of the management use them? I wonder why the management feel they are deserving of a special "partner" status?
4 Yes they do. The recent mail shot is a case in point.

I fear it is you that fails to understand, not me.

[teapot418]

The IPSE don't send emails round promoting those 78 though. They have however sent emails selling the "virtues" of the one being talked about...

And my opinion of that particular firm is known both here and on IPSE....

This one?

https://www.ipse.co.uk/news/ipse-del...cy-partnership

I'm a customer and very happy with their service.

[eek]

This one?

https://www.ipse.co.uk/news/ipse-del...cy-partnership

I'm a customer and very happy with their service.

Nope, nowt wrong with intouch albeit they have lost a few decent staff over the years.

This one begins with B is based in Warrington and used to service Managed Service Companies before HMRC put the kaboosh on MSCs....

They also have some rather interesting sidelines within their umbrella businesses that I think may come back to bite those that promote them...

This is of course utterly off-topic here as was IPSE claiming glory for things I don't believe they had any impact on....