Why would that screw you over? (Not disagreeing with you, just trying to understand)Stom wrote:I haven't looked at how it works, but I'm, for instance, working for a startup at the moment on a per-hour contract, around 10 or so hours a week. Would that count as employment? Would screw me over if it did, you see.
It’s.......
- Son of Mathonwy
- Posts: 4953
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm
Re: It’s.......
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: It’s.......
I was thinking more you don't limit the liability, though for a large number it should be straightforward not to cock the finances upSandydragon wrote:I know of a lot of consultants who operate via sole trader companies who are just finding regular work and winding things up. It will drive consultancy into the arms of bigger companies who can make a case that any transaction is B2B, provided they were employing their staff.Digby wrote:Being a sole trader is a massive risk here, unless they've changed the liabilities?
That said, independent consultants are still earning £600 plus per day and even when PAYE is deducted, will be taking home equivalent of good annual salaries. They can be let go with every minimal notice with no employment rights, so I can see how this is going to cause problems, but compared to zero hours workers on minimum sage, my sympathy is a bit limited.
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: It’s.......
Sandydragon wrote: Thie big issue that made lots f people mad/ or rich depending on your perspective, wa government departments hiring in specialist talent as contractors and leaving them in post for years (with a short break every 2 years to avoid giving them full employment rights) which was really expensive but avoided questions about overall head count.
I don't know about likely duration, but in the last couple of weeks I've encountered 3 staffing appointments where perm staff were moved on.out whilst on salaries of say £70-90k and they've been replaced by contractors on salaries around £700-1100 per day, and the one earning over the £1k is a moron into the bargain
-
- Posts: 18868
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: It’s.......
Not that much of a moron to be getting paid that much, caveat emptor and all that. I think its clear who the real morons are.Digby wrote:Sandydragon wrote: Thie big issue that made lots f people mad/ or rich depending on your perspective, wa government departments hiring in specialist talent as contractors and leaving them in post for years (with a short break every 2 years to avoid giving them full employment rights) which was really expensive but avoided questions about overall head count.
I don't know about likely duration, but in the last couple of weeks I've encountered 3 staffing appointments where perm staff were moved on.out whilst on salaries of say £70-90k and they've been replaced by contractors on salaries around £700-1100 per day, and the one earning over the £1k is a moron into the bargain
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: It’s.......
There is that, I offered them someone who'd do an excellent job and would probably be happy at £50k so not even the salary they were paying, but this action they've taken shows as a cost cutting measure so they're not looking to make a changeBanquo wrote:Not that much of a moron to be getting paid that much, caveat emptor and all that. I think its clear who the real morons are.Digby wrote:Sandydragon wrote: Thie big issue that made lots f people mad/ or rich depending on your perspective, wa government departments hiring in specialist talent as contractors and leaving them in post for years (with a short break every 2 years to avoid giving them full employment rights) which was really expensive but avoided questions about overall head count.
I don't know about likely duration, but in the last couple of weeks I've encountered 3 staffing appointments where perm staff were moved on.out whilst on salaries of say £70-90k and they've been replaced by contractors on salaries around £700-1100 per day, and the one earning over the £1k is a moron into the bargain
-
- Posts: 18868
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: It’s.......
Its staggered me for years, on both sides of the table.Digby wrote:There is that, I offered them someone who'd do an excellent job and would probably be happy at £50k so not even the salary they were paying, but this action they've taken shows as a cost cutting measure so they're not looking to make a changeBanquo wrote:Not that much of a moron to be getting paid that much, caveat emptor and all that. I think its clear who the real morons are.Digby wrote:
I don't know about likely duration, but in the last couple of weeks I've encountered 3 staffing appointments where perm staff were moved on.out whilst on salaries of say £70-90k and they've been replaced by contractors on salaries around £700-1100 per day, and the one earning over the £1k is a moron into the bargain
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10447
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: It’s.......
Until recently I worked for an organisation that had an entire change team of contracts on a minimum of £600 per day (all outside IR35) who achieved fuck all over two years. I was invoked in a review of costs as the company suddenly realised that it was spending too much. The biggest spike was this team of contractors. Even when pointed out, directors were still reluctant to cull them.Digby wrote:Sandydragon wrote: Thie big issue that made lots f people mad/ or rich depending on your perspective, wa government departments hiring in specialist talent as contractors and leaving them in post for years (with a short break every 2 years to avoid giving them full employment rights) which was really expensive but avoided questions about overall head count.
I don't know about likely duration, but in the last couple of weeks I've encountered 3 staffing appointments where perm staff were moved on.out whilst on salaries of say £70-90k and they've been replaced by contractors on salaries around £700-1100 per day, and the one earning over the £1k is a moron into the bargain
Reliance on contractors is like a drug.
-
- Posts: 13436
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:17 am
Re: It’s.......
I sold myself back to the company I worked for many years back. Actually I sold them a whole fleet of services and took around 100 staff with me, split across the UK, India and Poland. Which has worked out pretty well but I'm not convinced it's a better model than keeping it in house tbh, that's for them not meSandydragon wrote:Until recently I worked for an organisation that had an entire change team of contracts on a minimum of £600 per day (all outside IR35) who achieved fuck all over two years. I was invoked in a review of costs as the company suddenly realised that it was spending too much. The biggest spike was this team of contractors. Even when pointed out, directors were still reluctant to cull them.Digby wrote:Sandydragon wrote: Thie big issue that made lots f people mad/ or rich depending on your perspective, wa government departments hiring in specialist talent as contractors and leaving them in post for years (with a short break every 2 years to avoid giving them full employment rights) which was really expensive but avoided questions about overall head count.
I don't know about likely duration, but in the last couple of weeks I've encountered 3 staffing appointments where perm staff were moved on.out whilst on salaries of say £70-90k and they've been replaced by contractors on salaries around £700-1100 per day, and the one earning over the £1k is a moron into the bargain
Reliance on contractors is like a drug.
- cashead
- Posts: 3987
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 4:34 am
Re: It’s.......



lol, what an own-goal.
For the record, the account they were re-tweeting basically libelled Starmer so hard they ceased to exist.
I'm a god
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
How can you kill a god?
Shame on you, sweet Nerevar
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10447
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: It’s.......
No arguments there, this is disgusting behaviour from Dorries et al.
-
- Posts: 18868
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: It’s.......
she's horrendous.(Dorries)Sandydragon wrote:No arguments there, this is disgusting behaviour from Dorries et al.
-
- Posts: 18868
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: It’s.......
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52653609
classy response from Starmer. As someone said, if you wanted to build an opposition leader for this time, its him.
classy response from Starmer. As someone said, if you wanted to build an opposition leader for this time, its him.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 14529
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: It’s.......
Good response from all concerned, particularly Starmer, but stupidity from those Conservatives who retweeted without checking the facts.Banquo wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52653609
classy response from Starmer. As someone said, if you wanted to build an opposition leader for this time, its him.
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10447
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: It’s.......
Dorries is a disgrace. Its bad enough that she is an MP (she used to be my MP) but to be a minister is beyond all reason except that Boris wanted to surround himself with fellow Brexiteers and lightweights.Mellsblue wrote:Good response from all concerned, particularly Starmer, but stupidity from those Conservatives who retweeted without checking the facts.Banquo wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52653609
classy response from Starmer. As someone said, if you wanted to build an opposition leader for this time, its him.
If she has time to be doing this now then she isn't focusing enough on her day job.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 14529
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: It’s.......
Yep. Too many in cabinet and in ministerial positions solely because they are Brexiteers.Sandydragon wrote:Dorries is a disgrace. Its bad enough that she is an MP (she used to be my MP) but to be a minister is beyond all reason except that Boris wanted to surround himself with fellow Brexiteers and lightweights.Mellsblue wrote:Good response from all concerned, particularly Starmer, but stupidity from those Conservatives who retweeted without checking the facts.Banquo wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52653609
classy response from Starmer. As someone said, if you wanted to build an opposition leader for this time, its him.
If she has time to be doing this now then she isn't focusing enough on her day job.
- Stom
- Posts: 5819
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: It’s.......
And Grant Shapps...
How he is still in government is beyond me. Why do people not simply say no to their potential MPs? It's insane. I was lucky in the last GE, I was back in the UK and the LD candidate was a lovely woman who I met twice in the week I was there. If they'd put up a nonsense candidate of the likes of Shapps, I'd not have voted for them.
How he is still in government is beyond me. Why do people not simply say no to their potential MPs? It's insane. I was lucky in the last GE, I was back in the UK and the LD candidate was a lovely woman who I met twice in the week I was there. If they'd put up a nonsense candidate of the likes of Shapps, I'd not have voted for them.
-
- Posts: 18868
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: It’s.......
christ, we'll be here a long time if calling out all the comedy MPs!Stom wrote:And Grant Shapps...
How he is still in government is beyond me. Why do people not simply say no to their potential MPs? It's insane. I was lucky in the last GE, I was back in the UK and the LD candidate was a lovely woman who I met twice in the week I was there. If they'd put up a nonsense candidate of the likes of Shapps, I'd not have voted for them.
Oh and I've met many MPs who are lovely people but are sh*t MPs

- Stom
- Posts: 5819
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am
Re: It’s.......
That's true. But it's surely up to the electorate to reject all of them.Banquo wrote:christ, we'll be here a long time if calling out all the comedy MPs!Stom wrote:And Grant Shapps...
How he is still in government is beyond me. Why do people not simply say no to their potential MPs? It's insane. I was lucky in the last GE, I was back in the UK and the LD candidate was a lovely woman who I met twice in the week I was there. If they'd put up a nonsense candidate of the likes of Shapps, I'd not have voted for them.
Oh and I've met many MPs who are lovely people but are sh*t MPs
But the parties know they can put anyone forward as the majority of voters only see Red, Blue, or a nationalist party.
-
- Posts: 18868
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: It’s.......
yep, mainly. That's probably why a lot are so sh&t. Chicken, meet eggStom wrote:That's true. But it's surely up to the electorate to reject all of them.Banquo wrote:christ, we'll be here a long time if calling out all the comedy MPs!Stom wrote:And Grant Shapps...
How he is still in government is beyond me. Why do people not simply say no to their potential MPs? It's insane. I was lucky in the last GE, I was back in the UK and the LD candidate was a lovely woman who I met twice in the week I was there. If they'd put up a nonsense candidate of the likes of Shapps, I'd not have voted for them.
Oh and I've met many MPs who are lovely people but are sh*t MPs
But the parties know they can put anyone forward as the majority of voters only see Red, Blue, or a nationalist party.
-
- Posts: 11972
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:10 pm
Re: It’s.......
Maria Caulfield isn’t a name I think I’d heard a few weeks back but she seems to be on an absolute rampage of being totally awful and totally wrong about basically everything.
I guess politics just naturally attracts/nurtures these kinds of people.
I guess politics just naturally attracts/nurtures these kinds of people.