EDSGFS TREEDS DWP Project

[ygo98s]

Hi all, I have posted this thread mainly for the contractors currently working on the EDSGFS Dept of Works & Pensions XP roll out, although we welcome comments and advise from all.

As an introduction, the aim of this project is the roll out of around 150,000 desktop PC's to all DWP office in the UK. The project started at the beginning of last summer and is expected to continue for another 5-6 months. It is currently staffed by over 100 contractors located all over the UK.

The reason for this thread is to do with the way EDSGFS are constantly cutting costs by cutting back on contractors, making us work 12 hour + days and reducing our earning possibilities, totally ignoring what is written in our contracts.

Bench Time - Reduced from 7.5 to 5.5 hours per day (bench time is an EDS term for sitting at home if they have no work for you)

Laid off over 150 contractors in three phases during the autumn of last year. Previously there were over 300 contractors on this project.

Reducing travel time from the actual time it takes a contractor to get from home to the DWP office that they are working at and back home, minus the first 30 minutes. We are now expect to calm a maximum of 30 minutes per day per journey. Considering that we are required to work at any site within the UK, we sometimes find ourselves working at other ends of the country.

The ending of our contracts over the Xmas period with a subsequent restart in January.

All of the above have been forced onto us and totally goes against what is contained within our contracts. There were never any amendments / re-negotiations of our contracts other than some contracts being sacked and then re-engaged on weekly rolling contracts.

Finally, this week non of the contractors have been paid and we have been given various reasons as to the cause of the non-payment.

[ygo98s]

I feel now the time has come for us to do something collectively about the way EDSGFS treats us contractors and to stop them constantly moving the ‘goal posts’. Firstly we have seen our bench time cut down to five and half hours per day. Next we were faced with numerous rounds of job cuts, then came the festive ending of our contacts on the 22nd December and the subsequent contract resumption during January and finally over half of last weeks timesheets were blocked because GFS were not willing to pay bench for the 8th January.

I am not talking about taking any form of industrial action, work to rule or removal of good will, but propose that we make a joint response to this latest cost cutting exercise. Therefore, I propose that we either make a joint response back to EDSGFS, against the introduction of the new travel procedures or approach our agency, Synergize and get them to represent us. If any of you have any other suggestions or ideas on how best to approach this, then please let us know by posting on this thread.

On any representation we make, I would suggest that we offer our suggestions and help on ways that EDSGFS can reduce costs and improve the service that EDSGFS provides to EDS / DWP.

[DaveB]

You sound like a whinging permie.

None of what you have complained about should be an issue for a contractor. It goes with the territory.

If the client decides they dont want you any more thats their call. They dont want you in over the Christmas period, their call - They arn't the only big co. to do this btw, my client has the same policy.

Getting paid when there is no work to do puts you firmly inside IR35, if you arn't already.

[Buffoon]

The phrase ‘sup with the devil’ comes to mind. If you have anything to do with government and those collaborator companies then expect to be shafted.

It is official policy of my company that we do not do any government work under any circumstances.

[cojak]

You can forget it matey - this ain't a trade union.

I walked away happy when they told me I couldn't go in from 18th Dec to 8th Jan - I could have found training work but decided to go on holiday.

If you don't like it find another contract.

It sounds to me as if the client is finally waking up and managing contractor resources properly (for the business)*.

If you want to stand up and be counted, fine but don't expect any other contractor to join you.

* The only bit where you have a solid gripe is the non-payment of invoices, but there are things you can do regarding that, non of which you've suggested.
Try Thomas Higgins to collect any outstanding money, then walk.

[Rumbl3r]

Surely the point here is not whether they can change their terms, but rather can they change them mid-contract? If so, what is the point of a rolling contract where they set the dates?

Isn't the point of a contract exactly that, and agreement between 2 parties which is set in concrete until it is terminated?

I work on this contract and to be honest I can see why they have changed certain things, as their are some who have taken the pi$$ out of the rules and spoilt it for the rest of us.

Their latest change is still not clarified but if it is implemented as it has been stated then many people will lose out on many travelling hours, when what they were attempting to do was to stop the people who claimed they drove 3 hours back home every evening and 3 hours back in the morning, when in fact they just paid £20 for a B&B for the night and went nowhere!

The bottom line is that they will now have a reluctance from the contractors to travel more than 1.5 hours from home with the demoralising effect. I agree that if we don't like it we just leave, and from their perspective they can say that any idiot will take our place, but trust me I have worked with some of these idiots and the project will just suffer losing them a level of reputation.

I agree that the overall deal we're offered is better than most, but as I stated at the start if that's the deal then they should stick with it till they renew peoples contracts and then change the terms. Otherwise why bother with a contract at all? If we were permies we could sue for breach of contract and win! Are we saying being a contractor doesn't have any basic rights?

[Cowboy Bob]

Are we saying being a contractor doesn't have any basic rights?

That's about the long and short of it, yes. If you employ a builder to do some work on your house, does he have any employment rights? Can you tell him he can't work Mondays? Can you tell him half way though the job that you're getting someone else to finish the it? Of course you can. Contractors are like builders. Or at least they should be and that's why we get the higher rates. We're supposed to be in business in our own right. Act like a business, not an employee.

[Rumbl3r]

We're supposed to be in business in our own right. Act like a business, not an employee.

But we don't enter into a written contract with a builder? If we did and we didn't specify he couldn't work Mondays then we couldn't tell him not to work Mondays after we have both signed?

I am thinking as a business and a contract is exactly what it says it is surely?

[VectraMan]

Surely the point here is not whether they can change their terms, but rather can they change them mid-contract?

If they really are breaching the terms of the contract, why are you whinging on here? Go sue them.

[Cowboy Bob]

But we don't enter into a written contract with a builder? If we did and we didn't specify he couldn't work Mondays then we couldn't tell him not to work Mondays after we have both signed?

I am thinking as a business and a contract is exactly what it says it is surely?

I have never had a contract that specified the hours or days to work - it usually specifies what the client considers a "professional working day" but there is no agreement that either I work those hours, or that the client has enough work to fill those hours.

In fact, if the contract does specify things like that then you're likely to fall foul of IR35 as this will directly affect two of the pointers - Mutuality of Obligation (MOO) and Direction and Control (D&C).

So either you get those clauses put in your contract and pay up the extra tax for IR35, or you make sure they're not in there, pay less tax, and take the extra risk. You can't have both.