Minimum standards

[Invisiblehand]

take home" but in the illustration that value is artificially high

This happened to me when I got pitched by a fairly well known accountancy. I'd be surprised if it changed.

[DolanContractorGroup]

Hi webberg,

I couldn't reply to your PM because your inbox was full.

I'll copy my response to the PM here:

Hi webberg,

The information isn't really confidential, as it should have exactly the same parameters as used by other compliant umbrella employers.

The calculator should be able to be adjusted to take into account circumstances where there is no personal allowance, and all it will do is lower the weekly/monthly net income. It should be noted that these calculations are for illustration only. The figures should set an expectation, but it may operate differently at the point of payroll.

Kind regards

Zeeshan

[webberg]

Hi webberg,

I couldn't reply to your PM because your inbox was full.

I'll copy my response to the PM here:

Hi webberg,

The information isn't really confidential, as it should have exactly the same parameters as used by other compliant umbrella employers.

The calculator should be able to be adjusted to take into account circumstances where there is no personal allowance, and all it will do is lower the weekly/monthly net income. It should be noted that these calculations are for illustration only. The figures should set an expectation, but it may operate differently at the point of payroll.

Kind regards

Zeeshan

Thank you. I have fixed my inbox now.

I very much appreciate the response - the only umbrella so far brave enough to do that.

I have highlighted a couple of issues.

Where the income WILL be more than the PA limit then the illustration SHOULD be adjusted or the individual TOLD IN VERY CLEAR TERMS that the quoted value is not the final take home. (In my opinion).

Most clients will NOT regard the numbers as an illustration but rather a PROMISE. Perhaps they should not, but they do. This is part of the equation that produces the problem. (Again in my opinion).

[DolanContractorGroup]

Thank you. I have fixed my inbox now.

I very much appreciate the response - the only umbrella so far brave enough to do that.

Thanks webberg.

As I said in my PM, I'm only here to help. Umbrella companies do serve a purpose in the industry, but may not suit everyone's requirements. Unfortunately, some agencies and clients don't advertise rates clearly and temporary workers then have different expectations on what they will earn. If all agencies correctly uplifted the umbrella rate to include employment costs, then I don't think anyone would have any issues with umbrella employment.

I have highlighted a couple of issues.

Where the income WILL be more than the PA limit then the illustration SHOULD be adjusted or the individual TOLD IN VERY CLEAR TERMS that the quoted value is not the final take home. (In my opinion).

I think that this should work on a case by case basis. As the typical duration of an assignment is between 3-6 months, most umbrella companies illustrations may not be hitting that mark. However, if the worker knows that there's a good chance that the duration is long and the pay rate high enough for this to be an issue, then the company should try its best to give an accurate example as possible with the non-PA circumstances included; and also advise that a self assessment is needed.

Most clients will NOT regard the numbers as an illustration but rather a PROMISE. Perhaps they should not, but they do. This is part of the equation that produces the problem. (Again in my opinion).

Yes, and I think that this is a genuine problem.

And not all workers are clued up on tax codes and how things work. So if the calculation is based on one set of circumstances, and then HMRC advises the company of a different tax code which reduces the worker's income, that's outside anyone's control but it's the worker who feels aggrieved.


Kind regards

Zeeshan