Securing a good Work From Home from the off

[BR14]

TL: DR.

this sounds vaguely familiar.

[clearedforlanding]

I think people realise that you get a lot of grief if you go round doing the Bertie big bollocks "I'm a business and I decide the terms" everywhere you go.

The reality is never as clean cut. Unless you want to go to a lot of effort getting and quickly losing gigs.

For those who've given practical advice - thank you!

I would suggest a quick trip to Hanoi or Da Nang and check out all the expat freelancers that have things exactly on their terms.

Clients are having to start to compete for suppliers. The US has wrapped their head round this.

It is about time that the UK & EU do the same.

If you are tulip however......

[PerfectStorm]

As it is every goon I speak to from an agency at the moment has absolutely no idea when I talk about wanting the client to understand IR35-safe working practices.

"Don't worry - the contract's less than 2 years!"

[jamesbrown]

If you're a specialist, consider building a network of overseas clients. It may take a while to build a network and to understand the local rules of engagement (e.g., much easier if you can find a local company to team with on bids), but the question of WFH doesn't even arise in that case; it's obvious that you will work from a location of your own choosing.

[billybiro]

There needs to be a fundamental correction in the mindset of clients, contractors, and agencies. Not even in respect to private sector IR35 changes coming next year, but right now. The lazy and loose predilection of clients to treat contractors as an effective employees has got to stop. They might start to get the idea once its their business in the crosshairs for Tax and NI, but since it's yours right now you should be pushing for proper terms of engagement and the proper autonomy and discretion that comes with the running your own business. If you're ignoring all of that judging that HMRC probably won't come for you, think again.

I wouldn't mind so much but it doesn't take very much adjustment to have your relationship with the client written in the proper terms, with mutually understood independent working practices, and they'll still get the work out of you and value to their business, and your business will still take excellent revenue.

Just so you know I'm not talking crap - I offered notice 3 weeks into a contract recently when it became apparent that I was being treated as an employee. They had no coordinated project of work for me to do, so I was largely sat there awaiting dribs and drabs that occurred to them as time went on. They were inflexible about WFH despite there being no practical reason to be there, and generally speaking would have failed every IR35 working-practice test going. The day rate was excellent, but aside from being so dull I dreaded going there, the risk is simply too great. Against an enquiry I'd just have no defence, since they'd have regarded the working practices more strongly than the contract (which I'd already had run through Qdos and tweaked).

Now here's the bonus: When I handed the notice they wanted to know why, and we had a very productive meeting. They admitted that they rather thoughtlessly used contractors to backfill employees, and completely conceded on all of my points about working practices. They admitted they were only vaguely aware of the legislation but knew they needed to do something and properly think about what they wanted completed as defined project of work. They knew they weren't upholding their obligations properly and I felt bad for them because they'd clearly had no top-down training or guidance on the issue. Clients need to understand how to engage contractors properly, and you need to help teach them. They also asked if there was anything they could do to salvage the existing contract, which I didn't think there was, but they did ask whether I'd be available for a re-engagement once they'd got their act together. I said that would be good, and if not for me then at least to make life better for the next contractor they secure. If they actually think about what work they want doing properly, that person can work independently and without direction, and do so happy and safe knowing they're mitigating tulipty interpretation of IR35 rules as best they can.

As it is every goon I speak to from an agency at the moment has absolutely no idea when I talk about wanting the client to understand IR35-safe working practices. They haven't done any of their homework, it's news to them. They need teaching too. A recruiter said to me just today 'I haven't learned about any of that IR35 stuff yet but I'm waiting to go on a workshop on it'. Meanwhile the job description he sent me said 'Permanent, open to contract' - which is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. They just think you're basically an employee, they've scoped their role for a permie. All of the thinking is just backwards.

Or yeah, just keep your head down and do what your client wants - might work for a while yet......

Whilst all of this is entirely true, the problem is that 99% of all clients and agencies don't want to employ the services of a contractor. They want a temporary permanent employee. Most of those that genuinely do want the services of a contractor, are engaging the services of large consulting companies, not the rinkydink companies of one-man bands.

Sure, you can try to teach the clients and the agencies the error of their ways, but as you've said yourself, this often comes after you terminate the contract and are back on the bench. It's almost impossible to teach people the realities of contracting, have them accept those realities without question or resistance and maintain significant continuity of work. These clients want contractors who, at least at face-value, appear to be no different to them than employees. In other words, they want you under the same (or mostly the same) D&C as the staff. Whilst they may have this mindset due to ignorance around contractors and contracting, they're also highly unlikely to want to change this way of thinking either. After all, how does a change in this thinking benefit the client? (Pending IR35 reform changes notwithstanding).

I do agree that fundamental thinking from agencies and clients needs to change but I don't think, as a contractor, you're in the best position to do it. Unless, of course, you wish to martyr yourself to the cause and lead a life of suffering to better the environment for all those other contractors that follow you.

[SussexSeagull]

Depends on the client and project. I did some SC work and WFH was never going to happen while at other projects they seemed surprised when i walked into the office.

Never had it written into a contract and TBH would find that a but restrictive as at some stages of a project you need to be able to access people face to face while at others you can be more productive off site.

As for determining status I would probably do much the same if I was being paid per deliverable as per daily rate but I do agree that some clients do want the penny and the bun and essential have someone they treat like a Permie without the downside of gibing them holidays, training, development, etc.

We are right as individuals to push back against this but it is extremely hard to change the culture and working practice of an organisation as an external supplier.

[ladymuck]

Tbh this. Unless you're playing this game where you only pretend you're a business but actually work as an shadow employee, you are a business and have discretion over whether you need to attend at your client's place of business. The client might prefer you to be on site, but it's something you negotiate on a practical basis. Undue insistence that you have to be on site when there's no functional reason to be (e.g. a meeting, exposure to something you simply can't do remotely) should be an alarm bell that you're under direction and control.

My emphasis

There are some things that cannot be done remotely. My current client has varying levels of access: what you can access on your own kit (regardless of location), what you can access on their kit remotely, and what you can access on their kit on site. This isn't a D&C alarm call. This is a security implementation.

[billybiro]

My emphasis

There are some things that cannot be done remotely. My current client has varying levels of access: what you can access on your own kit (regardless of location), what you can access on their kit remotely, and what you can access on their kit on site. This isn't a D&C alarm call. This is a security implementation.

This isn't quite correct.

Sure, there are things that aren't allowed to be done remotely, because the client says so, but for work involving a computer in 2019, there is nothing that technically can't be done remotely. There's a difference.

(And the more progressive and savvy clients can operate just as securely - if not more so - than those that insist on only on-site working because "security").

[ladymuck]

This isn't quite correct.

Sure, there are things that aren't allowed to be done remotely, because the client says so, but for work involving a computer in 2019, there is nothing that technically can't be done remotely. There's a difference.

(And the more progressive and savvy clients can operate just as securely - if not more so - than those that insist on only on-site working because "security").

But it isn't a D&C flag. Agreed that technically savvy clients can get around most limitations but not all clients are like that and prefer to implement security in different ways.

It would seem the assumption is that clients with less than modern technology are like that solely in order to control the workforce. Regulated industries would love to be at the bleeding edge but having seen the hoops a bank jumped through to get less than 100 people on an O365 trial I think your expectations are a little squiffy.

[northernladuk]

Plenty of proper B2B contracts with medium and large consultancies require the staff on client site. Just because something is possible doesn't mean it is ideal for the client. Nothing wrong with a client not liking WFH.