15th September 2008, 03:55 PM
I'm afraid I don't really know much more...
I would have thought as we have a legal system based on precedent, this is definitely going to affect anyone who's been asked to be self-employed and shouldn't really be. I skim read the ruling (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/2113.html) and unless I'm mistaken most of it relied on the fact that there was no written contract between the self-employed IT contractor and his 'employer'.
I think the most blantent thing to be aware of is it's not the 'employer' who gets penalised, it's the 'employee'. I didn't see any mention of them having to pay backdated employers NI for instance. If the only person getting penalised is the freelancer then companies (not just in our industry) are going to keep trying their luck as there are no financial / legal implications for them.
I would have thought as we have a legal system based on precedent, this is definitely going to affect anyone who's been asked to be self-employed and shouldn't really be. I skim read the ruling (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/2113.html) and unless I'm mistaken most of it relied on the fact that there was no written contract between the self-employed IT contractor and his 'employer'.
I think the most blantent thing to be aware of is it's not the 'employer' who gets penalised, it's the 'employee'. I didn't see any mention of them having to pay backdated employers NI for instance. If the only person getting penalised is the freelancer then companies (not just in our industry) are going to keep trying their luck as there are no financial / legal implications for them.