IfA Now have a policy on Self Employment

[Wax]

A professional institute aiming for charted status might want to provide legal help and guidance for those members who are self employed. It would be nice to have examples of contracts and help with persuing those who default on paying its members.

it's this sort of practical service rather than blue sky
policies that would persuade me to join.

[Martin Locock]

Fair enough - but if SE don't join, they won't see the demand for the service. If you joined now you could contribute towards its development!

[BAJR]

help with persuing those who default on paying its members.

Fear not, for a BAJRite is actually preparing such a document. it ain't nice, it ain't easy, but we have to get away from being a soft touch. Once their case is dealt with they will be able to create a new BAJR Guide.

[BAJR]

Within this discussion I should point out there is another level called "labour only" - even that has requirements in law. To be fair (to us) we have been banging on about this and battling it for years. There is nothing wrong, per-ce with self employed digging, but don't get lulled into thinking it is all ok. I spent a long time in a past life being treated like an employee on SE rates. rates I did not control going on sites I did not choose and working when I was told. I bust out of that over 15 years ago... thank god I had paid tax.. others had not... and suffered.. some still do! No mortage for them - for example!

Perhaps he IfA would work with BAJR to help clarify it. To be honest, my 2005 guide was tougher! and BAJR has taken a strong stance on this for years. I hope the IfA will as well.

[Dinosaur]

quick bit of mental suggests that they would have 365 working days if they wanted them - but most people deserve weekends and holidays and time with their families etc even if patronising old lags didnt get them when they started out

233 is the figure most people will recognise as the working year

Then they aren't really making the most of being self-employed then, are they? I actually did use to make the most of weekend/bank holiday working whenever available, and Xmas day is actually a very good work day, no danger of being distracted by anything on TV for a start! And none of that nonsense about only being allowed to work a 40hr week. And certainly around here there seems to be a problem with employees failing to actually use their leave entitlement (I certainly always fail, too much to do), to the extent that they're talking about optionally buying some of it back from next year. I quite miss the flexibilty of being self-employed (and the occasional big bucks and the fun of filling in the old tax form in order to get all those tax breaks for the self-employed that always seem to get ignored in discussions like this) - sold out and went for the pension in order to annoy Unit :face-crying:

[Unitof1]

There is nothing wrong, per-ce with self employed digging, but don't get lulled into thinking it is all ok

its a hedge but I wouldnt bet on it. make your mind up.

bajr when are you going to read your own properganda and the new ify rubbish-its employers that are up to illegalities which they never do to the short terminadequate boozos that dino drives around do they. Hang on wait a second try this

Theres everything wrong with empolyment but its not all bad


Martin

when to hand over context sheets is the core principle

ask the tax man if you dont believe me

[Martin Locock]

i
Martin

when to hand over context sheets is the core principle

ask the tax man if you dont believe me

That was my point - it's for the law/taxman to say, not the IfA.

[Wax]

"it's for the law and tax man to say not the IFA" If that's the case why are they telling registered organisations and members who are employers to obey the law and HMRC guide lines? More importantly if they are having to do this it implies that there are registered organisations out there who are breaking the law.

[Marcus Brody]

"it's for the law and tax man to say not the IFA" If that's the case why are they telling registered organisations and members who are employers to obey the law and HMRC guide lines?

What else should they say? They can't very well advise members or registered organisations to act illegally. I suppose you could argue that they shouldn't specifically need to tell these people / companies to act in accordance with the law of the land and tax code, and that this should be implicit, but where they're dealing with financial and legal matters, there's such a level of complexity that the IFA would be entering a potential minefield were it to attempt to second-guess these matters. Surely it's better to say that if you've got a problem with legal or financial matters, you should talk to an expert in the relevant field, rather than relying on a body whose role is not primarily in either of these spheres.

[Wax]

I would expect a chartered organisation to have it's own legal department who understand and can advise on things like employment law and the profession . Despite the complexities of employment law I would also expect any decent employer to be well informed as many of the contributors here clearly are. I feel that there is clearly a problem which the IFA are well aware of, when I see a registered organisation removed for flouting employment laws then I might feel it was worth parting with my hard earned cash to join.