3 ms·

Contracting is still alive, posing as a contractor while being an employee is dead. Tech pay is low compared to the US, but still very high compared to average

• varispeed 3y ago
  > Contracting is still alive, posing as a contractor while being an employee is dead. In some odd niches where the pool of talent is very small and client's can take the risk of getting status determination wrong - yes, but this is also shrinking and people retire early. You have also wrong understanding of IR35. The legislation has been created to protect interests of big consultancies so that their developers don't quit and start working with their clients directly taking profit for themselves. If the legislation was about "working as employee" then the big consultancies that supply workers who do just that wouldn't be exempt from it.
  • gumballindie 3y ago
    > big consultancies so that their developers don't quit and start working with their clients directly taking profit for themselves. That and also to make it look like the government has increased the financing of the NHS and other government agencies that rely on contractors. Here is how it works: increase daily rates by classifying workers inside ir35, allocate more funding, claim half the finding back through taxes, use money for something else. But indeed the main reason is to help consultancies - notably those such as Infosys, owned by the prime minister’s family. The result is a steady brain drain, outsourcing of work, and a drop in quality. I do agree that some folks have been disguised employees, but the majority were not. Contracting has been the main driver of innovation - the best in tech were motivated to spread the knowledge and prop up the industry. Some of the best engineers I knew, hired or worked with, were contractors. Now a significant portion have left the country, are serving us clients or are moving on to something else. Being a permanent worker is simply not attractive given the low pay.
    • varispeed 3y ago
      > I do agree that some folks have been disguised employees, but the majority were not. Even that is a red herring. This angle has been created to gain public support for the legislation. If you run a business, you have to charge more than you would get paid as an employee, simply because of your overheads, things like insurance, accounting and whatever else that is part of running a business and to cover for periods of downtime or to be able to hire someone else. It is easy to create envy in that situation, because the worker sitting next to you seems just like you, does the same job, so why they are paid more and pay "less" tax? Most employees don't understand how business works so they of course support these rules thinking contractors are gaming the system. But they don't understand that if the contractor gets replaced by a "disguised employee" from a big consultancy, exactly the same thing is happening, except the big consultancy is taking all the profit. But workers got gaslighted - big consultancy = real business, someone like you trying to run exactly the same business = disguised employee That's what it is about. IR35 basically targets service based business where the owner of the business is providing service. This is probably how most of businesses start and this legislation blocks that to fill the pockets of big corporations. That's insane.
      • gumballindie 3y ago
        Precisely this. And exactly because people have no clue of the boiling water they’ve been put in and the rising temperature.