TechMahindra Contract

**cojak** · 10 September 2007, 10:42

Every contract is different - what is reviewed by one person may not be the contract that's put to you.

**daviejones** · 10 September 2007, 10:43

Originally posted by ZoppZ View Post

I am about to start contracting gig via TechMahindra. I have not seen the contract yet but I am informed it is IR35 friendly. Has anyone seen or had it reviewed? Any insight will be helpful.

Thanks in advance.

I assume you will be working on vodafone apps?

**ZoppZ** · 10 September 2007, 10:51

Originally posted by cojak View Post

Every contract is different - what is reviewed by one person may not be the contract that's put to you.

000's people work through them so they put forward a standard contract. TechMahindra's agancy business use to be called 1stContracts, now rebranded TechMahindra.

**OrangeHopper** · 10 September 2007, 12:20

I'm hoping to see one soon but I'm in an IR35 caught role at the moment and will be doing the same job for Tech Mahindra.

**facboy** · 10 September 2007, 13:16

the contract itself is not as important as the actual working practices. it's nice to have an 'IR35-friendly' contract, but it's not going to help you if your working practices are deemed to fall inside IR35.

**malvolio** · 10 September 2007, 14:24

Originally posted by facboy View Post

the contract itself is not as important as the actual working practices. it's nice to have an 'IR35-friendly' contract, but it's not going to help you if your working practices are deemed to fall inside IR35.

There speaks the voice of experience...

Ever wondered why every successful defence of an IR35 case has centered on the contractual terms and conditions?

**MarkOD** · 10 September 2007, 15:07

In fairness the contract isn't worth the paper its written on in my opinion if your working practice doesn't relate to it. It's all well having a substitution clause but if they investigated and it would never really apply then i imagine you'd be stuffed. Is that right Mal

**malvolio** · 10 September 2007, 15:34

Well yes it is - but nobody signs a contract that is wildly at odds with the work they are there to do... do they..??

The thing is that even a full-time support weenie can be outside IR35 if, for example, his contract allows him to send a substitute with the relevant abilities, provided the agency contract accurately reflect the client one. The recent Island Computing IR35 loss foundered on a few things but the key issue - that has not been picked up by anyone official, incidentally - was that the agency had issued a contract with clauses in it that they had no intention of honouring and which in fact flatly contradicted the other contract they had with the client.

Sadly the guy in question refused to carry on the fight, so we lost the chance of an interesting and valuable test case to sue the agency for misrepresentation. Another time, perhaps - there are plenty of potential candidates, after all.

**facboy** · 10 September 2007, 16:23

well perhaps i mis-spoke. i just wanted to emphasise that both are important. wasn't that recent case lost because the commissioners interviewed the client and the client's account of the working practices differed from what was outlined in the contract?

certainly all the companies that offer cover for outstanding tax/interest/penalties under IR35 are interested in the actual working practices, not just the terms of the contract. some don't even ask about the contract, they just ask about the working practices, but i've not seen the opposite.

edit: lol it appears i was referring to the island case. i gather that a major problem was that the contract (at least the agency-client contract) looked like a contract of service, and once the client 'changed' their account of the working practices the poor contractor didn't have a leg to stand on as both contract and practices were caught. in wonder what would have happened if the working practices had been deemed outside IR35 in spite of the contract?

TechMahindra Contract