• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Beta ESS

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by breaktwister View Post
    The various Uber cases around the world springs to mind. I am sure a lot of other cases where it is the employer who is insisting that the workers are self-employed and not employees.

    This is other other side of the IR35 determination problem, any PSC caught "inside" by the tests should be able to bring a claim for employment rights, holidays, pensions, sick pay - the works. I can't imagine a situation other than a purposely botched "test case" (which happens more than you think) in which a Court could say "well, these tests show that you are subject to SDC, no real substitution rights etc so we will regard you as an employee for tax purposes but NOT AN EMPLOYEE for anything else".
    Not sure that Uber is the best example.

    On the face of it, the drivers do look self-employed, so it will be interesting to see what the appeal throws up.

    (That's not to say they can't still be exploited).

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by breaktwister View Post
      The various Uber cases around the world springs to mind. I am sure a lot of other cases where it is the employer who is insisting that the workers are self-employed and not employees.
      Poor example. Uber never considered themselves employers. That was the point of the case but we'll see soon I guess

      This is other other side of the IR35 determination problem, any PSC caught "inside" by the tests should be able to bring a claim for employment rights, holidays, pensions, sick pay - the works. I can't imagine a situation other than a purposely botched "test case" (which happens more than you think) in which a Court could say "well, these tests show that you are subject to SDC, no real substitution rights etc so we will regard you as an employee for tax purposes but NOT AN EMPLOYEE for anything else".
      Tax and employment law are slightly different and we've already been discussing this in great detail in other threads so not sure why we are on the brink of starting this all over again. Take this point (if there is one) to the other threads this is already being discussed. This one is about the ESS tool.
      Last edited by northernladuk; 21 February 2017, 16:26.
      'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by teapot418 View Post
        Not sure that Uber is the best example.

        On the face of it, the drivers do look self-employed, so it will be interesting to see what the appeal throws up.

        (That's not to say they can't still be exploited).
        Uber is interesting in many ways - and something as I've said before I've spent hours discussing with VC's on the West Coast.

        but its not the topic on conversation here nor the reason for the my last post (which is that Mal seems to have changed his tune).
        merely at clientco for the entertainment

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by eek View Post
          Uber is interesting in many ways - and something as I've said before I've spent hours discussing with VC's on the West Coast.

          but its not the topic on conversation here nor the reason for the my last post (which is that Mal seems to have changed his tune).
          Really? I hadn't noticed; I've been saying that since at least 2003, and quite probably before then.

          The real beneficiaries of IR35 are the employers, and always have been. For a reduced cost of employment - even for a higher day rate - and a far less onerous set of legal requirements they can persuade the employees that they are better off. It started with bankers, but also applies to the Civil Service, the BBC, many hotel chains, swathes of the NHS and social services, cockle pickers and on and on and on. Why do you think there is no pressure to remove it other than from us contractors?
          Blog? What blog...?

          Comment


            #35
            Rumours from a show and tell this morning of one version of the tool say it's heavily RoS based and some mention of more than 4 concurrent clients.

            Still may not be a current version of the tool & weighting so treat with necessary caution.

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by teapot418 View Post
              Not sure that Uber is the best example.

              On the face of it, the drivers do look self-employed, so it will be interesting to see what the appeal throws up.

              (That's not to say they can't still be exploited).
              Uber unlike black cabs, mini cabs and other taxis tell the driver the exact route. If the driver goes of the route they get penalised.

              All other forms of taxis it is up to the driver to find the quickest and shortest route possible. Plus if the driver runs out of fuel they can stop at a petrol station if they want, but Uber drivers aren't allowed to do that.

              Hence Uber fails on D&C.
              "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

              Comment

              Working...
              X