self-employed?

[amber]

What do people think of the idea of site staff working as "self-employed"?

Good thing, bad thing?

Just wondering :face-huh:

[BAJR Host]

See the BAJR Guide

http://www.bajr.org/Documents/Employed_SelfEmployed.pdf

:: Employed or Self-Employed in Archaeology
(Guidance notes for Employers and Casual Workers)

from April 2005

Quite simple for Employers and Employees to see their status..

One thing to remember - The Inland Revenue, does not see shades of Gray...
They would take both the company AND the individuals to task.

As they said to me when I researched about this - ignorance is no defence - Yipes

All depends on circumstances

(Currently smarting from Tax Bill!!)




"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[1man1desk]

quote:What do people think of the idea of site staff working as "self-employed"?

Good thing, bad thing?

I have worked like this in the past. It is a bad thing, and a charter for exploitation. Essentially a scam for employers to avoid giving any employment rights.

Self-employed people should work under their own control, to their own timescales, to complete a product by a certain date. A team of site staff working under the direct supervision of someone else cannot therefore be made up of self-employed people.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[Gilraen]

I disagree. Some archaeologist's prefer to work on a self-employed basis,and I know this because they have said.

I do not see how an evaluation or excavation will be in any way harmed by the use of self-employed archaeologists. The problem arises when many self-employed people are coming in and out of a dig (3 people one week, 3 new people the next week) with no coherent structure as to the team. Many of us know that sometimes you just don't have the staff at the right time. But what is wrong with having a team made up out of self-employed archaeologists? I do not see it as exploitation if that is what they prefer.

I do agree with your point about expolitation, though. OK, so some may not prefer it. When I stated working for the Unit I am at now, it was on a self-employed basis, but not by choice. If I started working, say, at the beginning of September, my first invoice wasn't paid until the end of October. No sick pay, holiday. However, my Unit soon realised that, by making all temporary staff self-employed, they were not doing themselves any favours. Why should archaeologists put up with that when they can get a better job offer elsewhere with holiday, sick pay, pension scheme, etc? So now, unless an archaeologist prefers to be self-employed, they are taken on as a member of staff, however temporary the arrangement. Do other units do the same, or is it still the norm to pay a daily rate to temporary staff?

The generalisation that all unit managers are just waiting to expolit all archaeologists is naive and also untrue. Well, not with my unit anyway. Is it me being naive or am I just lucky? This isn't a rhetorical question by the way.

The problem arises with exploitation, I think. Naive 'not long out of university' graduates seem quite happy to work for £50 - £55 a day, whereas they should be demanding £100 a day at the very least - yes, even as graduates.

[tom wilson]

At least £26K per year Gilraen? For an inexperienced digger? That's quite a mark up to compensate for the lack of holiday and sick pay.

Nice idea though.

Personally, I would prefer to be self-employed. I would like the freedom to work where I like, but then I don't currently do site work. As I understand it, it's very difficult to legally be a self-employed digger. All those companies doing this as standard practice are heading for a fall if the inland revenue ever does an audit.

Perhaps anyone working for such a company could explain how they get around the situation outlined in the BAJR guide. Maybe there's a loophole I'm not aware of.

'Have a good plan, execute it violently, do it today'.
General MacArthur

[BAJR Host]

Tom is right...

and after much talking with Inland Revenue, two facts came out

1) They don't care if you think you are self employed (they look at the criteria and decide)
2) They will then check you and your records for 7 years back and you will have to account for every day - and will have to show that tax has been paid - they will also check every company you claim to have been self employed with... they will then check all the other people who worked for these companies that claim they were self employed.. - as I said before they don't really see things as greyscale issues.

As a self employed individual you must add on Pension , Holiday, sickness, NI, Tax and of course you will have to provide your own tools and have insurance)

So an employed person as you say would be getting all these AND £55 while you would have to charge £100 to make sure you were covering all these things...

The challange is set... can anyone try and prove they can be a self employed digger

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Gilraen]

Indeed. And as for the £26k - yes, maybe that is a big jump for an inexperienced digger! Wait a few years, then.
[8D]

[historic building]

Well remember it is only £26 grand a year if you work every day - including Christmas and all bank holidays, never take a day off and are never ill.

[tom wilson]

quote:Originally posted by historic building

Well remember it is only £26 grand a year if you work every day - including Christmas and all bank holidays, never take a day off and are never ill.

Yes, fair enough.
OK then, assuming 30 days holiday and ten days off sick (for example), that works out at £22K/year, which is still over half as much more than a typical digger salary. Still sounds pretty good. However if you are truely self-employed, your own insurance, accountancy fees, training, equipments costs etc. come out of that.
Perhaps £100/day wouldn't be so unreasonable.

So, assuming all this is legal (and no-one so far has answered that question), what would be a fair mark up? How much more do specialists in equivalent areas of construction get for self-employed than PAYE work?

[BAJR Host]

As I have reported before, it is 'almost' impossible for a digger to be self employed.

Self-employed
If you can answer 'Yes' to all of the following questions, it will usually mean
you are self-employed.

Can you hire someone to do the work for you or engage helpers at
your own expense?

Do you risk your own money?

Do you provide the main items of equipment you need to do your job,
not just the small tools many employees provide for themselves?

Do you agree to do a job for a fixed price regardless of how long the
job may take?

Can you decide what work to do, how and when to do the work and
where to provide the services?

Do you regularly work for a number of different people?

Do you have to correct unsatisfactory work in your own time and at
your own expense?

Now I don't know about you... but a digger would be hard pressed to answer yes to even half of these.

So show me a self employed digger and I am sorry to say, you are most likely looking at someone who is putting both themselves, the company and others in danger of investigation by the Inland Revenue.






"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu