No PSCs - why the surprise?

[ladymuck]

The resource still has to be accounted for. So not as employees but as external resources/consultancy. That's not cooking the books.

But you wouldn't put in your accounts that you have consultancy resource of X bodies as you may not know how many (offshore) resources you bought with the multi-million pound contract.

You can only say we have this many FTEs employed by us. That still disguises the true level of resource needed to run the operation.

[NeedTheSunshine]

But you wouldn't put in your accounts that you have consultancy resource of X bodies as you may not know how many (offshore) resources you bought with the multi-million pound contract.

You can only say we have this many FTEs employed by us. That still disguises the true level of resource needed to run the operation.

The shareholders really don't care as long as the company is making a decent profit.

[ladymuck]

The shareholders really don't care as long as the company is making a decent profit.

I think you're slightly missing the point. Turnover per FTE is a measure used in some businesses. If you can hide FTE through contracts and do fancy accounting to capitalise some of those costs, it makes the business look more efficient than it really is.

[NotAllThere]

Not enough profit? Headcount freeze. The work still needs to be done, so contractors are brought it. I remember back in 2000, a permie IT worker in a bank complaining about the number of contractors in his workplace who'd been there for years.

[NeedTheSunshine]

I think you're slightly missing the point. Turnover per FTE is a measure used in some businesses. If you can hide FTE through contracts and do fancy accounting to capitalise some of those costs, it makes the business look more efficient than it really is.

Again the shareholders don't care. The business looks efficient. They get their dividends.

[NeedTheSunshine]

Not enough profit? Headcount freeze. The work still needs to be done, so contractors are brought it. I remember back in 2000, a permie IT worker in a bank complaining about the number of contractors in his workplace who'd been there for years.

I agree about the headcount freeze. But not about them bringing in tons of contractors. That was true in earlier years but it's not been the fact for several years now. Cost cutbacks now in the places I have worked mean contractors out. You do after all need a minimum number of permies to keep the place ticking over. And big projects are just not getting the funding that they used to. Sadly it's a whole different world than when I started out.

[DevUK]

what's that to do with you?
this thread is just more fecking flannel.

I think you have some issues. It might be time to try a hobby of some sort?

[Lance]

I think you have some issues. It might be time to try a hobby of some sort?

CUK is his hobby.

[ladymuck]

Again the shareholders don't care. The business looks efficient. They get their dividends.

When you work in an industry with a regulated asset base, it makes a difference.

Let's agree to disagree.

[SussexSeagull]

The fact remains no contractor has ever had to hold a gun to a clients head to get a contract. There is a need for us and there still is.

The game may change but it goes on.