Boss completing timesheet - am I overreacting!?

Also we had agreed payment date of the 28th of the month and today is the 28th and he has not paid me! I suppose as I am not on a contract I can leave when I like
 
I think if you have worked for him as SE for more than two years you have the same rights as an employed person in terms of holiday pay and sick leave. I am not 100% sure but you might want to double check this.

As long as the information he is filling in is correct then this is a very minor issue and I would let it go in order to keep the peace. If it is that annoying to you then don't leave your timesheet in your desk draw where he can get access to it.

If the agreement you have with him states that you are paid by the hour rather than according to the job he may need for his records the number of hours you have worked and when for his records. It may be in the past that someone has taken advantage and invoiced him for hours that have not been worked which is why he works this system. We sometimes get temps in at my work and the agency always sends the timesheet with the invoice so if he used agencies for recruiting temporary or staff on contracts then he may be used to this way of working. We have very strict financial auditing at our work and the timesheet it part of the audit trail. If he is running a complex scheme to reduce his tax liabilities it may be his accountants are advising him to make sure the timesheets come with invoice.
 
Last edited:
SO1 said:
I think if you have worked for him as SE for more than two years you have the same rights as an employed person in terms of holiday pay and sick leave. I am not 100% sure but you might want to double check this.

As long as the information he is filling in is correct then this is a very minor issue and I would let it go in order to keep the peace. If it is that annoying to you then don't leave your timesheet in your desk draw where he can get access to it.

If the agreement you have with him states that you are paid by the hour rather than according to the job he may need for his records the number of hours you have worked and when for his records. It may be in the past that someone has taken advantage and invoiced him for hours that have not been worked which is why he works this system. We sometimes get temps in at my work and the agency always sends the timesheet with the invoice so if he used agencies for recruiting temporary or staff on contracts then he may be used to this way of working. We have very strict financial auditing at our work and the timesheet it part of the audit trail. If he is running a complex scheme to reduce his tax liabilities it may be his accountants are advising him to make sure the timesheets come with invoice.
Click to expand...

Wrong on many counts SE have no rights at all with regards any benefits that employed people have and im sorry to say however this scheme has been cooked up it is only for one persons benefit and the OP is losing out on many fronts.
 
OP, report this guy to HMRC. hes been using you to reduce his costs and liability. Let HMRC know whats been happening and they can prosecute and fine him.
 
I am not sure why what the client is doing is illegal, surely if the contact is for the self employed person to be paid based on the number of hours worked then asking them to provide evidence of this along with the invoice is not unreasonable.

I work for an organisation that requires this as well and we have an HR and Legal team and I am sure if this was illegal we would not be asking for the same evidence.

I think there are some interesting legal challenges around if someone is self employed or a worker, if you look at the uber and deliveroo cases for example. I think companies using self employed people long term to try and get out of giving people employments rights and save on agency fees,] may have to think carefully about it as they could be challenged with something similar. I am not sure what the impact this would have on self employed people in some industries.

Our work a few years ago gave everyone who was not permanent but had been working for the organisations for at least two years the option to become permanent. Prior to that there were instances where people were on short term contracts and after a year they had to have a break for a couple of months and then get a new contract. The break I believe meant that they did not get the same rights as permanent people.

popsdosh said:
Wrong on many counts SE have no rights at all with regards any benefits that employed people have and im sorry to say however this scheme has been cooked up it is only for one persons benefit and the OP is losing out on many fronts.
Click to expand...
 
If the person is actually working regularly for the employer at his premises, and essentially she is not self employed then it is illegal. These problems often crop up in yards, where the employer wants the work done without the disadvantages [costs] of employing staff,.
When HMRC find out, the employer has to sort it out, usually the Vat man makes a visit when wrong doing is flagged up.
Goodness knows how many businesses use the "self-employed" to deliver Pizzas etc etc, there are no records, both sides "benefit", cash is paid by the business to the driver, who essentially pockets it, no insurance cover of course, as he has invalidated his vehicle insurance.
My business insurance only covers me for one particular business, essentially that excludes all others. My vehicle insurance is a bit more fluid, but there is a lot of small print and exclusions.
 
Last edited:
So I have been keeping my timesheet in my bag instead of my drawer. The latest is we have to leave time sheets on his desk every Friday to be signed off!
 
NooNoo59 said:
So I have been keeping my timesheet in my bag instead of my drawer. The latest is we have to leave time sheets on his desk every Friday to be signed off!
Click to expand...

I can't see anything wrong with this.

But his scheme of having you all 'self employed' is illegal and he needs reporting to the Tax Fraud anonymous phone line.
 
Exploding Chestnuts said:
If the person is actually working regularly for the employer at his premises, and essentially she is not self employed then it is illegal. These problems often crop up in yards, where the employer wants the work done without the disadvantages [costs] of employing staff,.
When HMRC find out, the employer has to sort it out, usually the Vat man makes a visit when wrong doing is flagged up.
Goodness knows how many businesses use the "self-employed" to deliver Pizzas etc etc, there are no records, both sides "benefit", cash is paid by the business to the driver, who essentially pockets it, no insurance cover of course, as he has invalidated his vehicle insurance.
My business insurance only covers me for one particular business, essentially that excludes all others. My vehicle insurance is a bit more fluid, but there is a lot of small print and exclusions.
Click to expand...

This is not true unless my accountants are snorting coke and making stuff up .
I have self employed contractors doing all sorts of stuff for me .
 
Goldenstar said:
This is not true unless my accountants are snorting coke and making stuff up .
I have self employed contractors doing all sorts of stuff for me .
Click to expand...

Yes, but if they are essentially working for you ie regularly, and you alone, using your "tools", and are not self-employed, with all the proper insurances etc, then you may well be seen to be employing them, whether you see it, or not.
Accountants are probably 4-5 high, on a "snort scale" of 10. They won't be paying your "fine", you will :)
 
Last edited:
NooNoo59 said:
So I have been keeping my timesheet in my bag instead of my drawer. The latest is we have to leave time sheets on his desk every Friday to be signed off!
Click to expand...

That isn't unreasonable.
But it does sound like you/he might be skating on thin ice regarding employment status.
 
Exploding Chestnuts said:
Yes, but if they are essentially working for you ie regularly, and you alone, using your "tools", and are not self-employed, with all the proper insurances etc, then you may well be seen to be employing them, whether you see it, or not.
Accountants are probably 4-5 high, on a "snort scale" of 10. They won't be paying your "fine", you will :)
Click to expand...

this and your earlier quote are both correct. The employer certainly has to sort it out along with possible interest and penalties. The VAT man will be informed as will the inspector examining any business accounts. It is unlikely that many of these so called "self employed" staff are actually self employed. Their employer needs to be operating PAYE. Many accountants turn a blind eye to this, let it go, don't examine the facts in sufficient detail.
 
I'm guessing as a self employed person, you don't get holiday or sick pay? These are just two of the benefits you would be entitled to if you were an employee of his companies, not to mention employment rights. The recent Uber case highlighted exactly this issue.
 
Not just uber either, there was the pimlico plumber recently too, it will be interesting to see if they decide to escalate it higher.
 
Bit late to this thread, and not going to comment on the substance, although slightly oddly it's probably the only time on HHO that I'm truly qualified to comment haha!

OP - this is a useful tool to help you work through what your status is from the tax man's perspective. If the link doesn't work, go onto the HMRC website and look at the section on employment status. It has an emp status indicator with some basic questions that you fill out, then it spits out the likely status.

This is for tax purposes. It's a slightly different approach for employment rights e.g. sick pay etc., although they will often look for the same factors. Lots of info on google if you need it though :-)

http://tools.hmrc.gov.uk/esi/invest...erviews_screens_xint$global$global?user=guest
 
ycbm said:
Well enlighten us then!

Are you saying fixed hours with one employer full time paid direct and not through an agency is not an employee?
Click to expand...

enlighten you? There is more to it than not working set hours and times as GS says. Work your way through the HMRC link that was supplied. Read the HMRC manual if you are really interested.

I was replying to your comment to GS that the accountant was correct and GS was not their employer. I am not sure how you are qualified to make that decision. No one can possibly say if GS's situation is an employee one based on the information suppled. There is simply not enough information.
 
paddy555 said:
enlighten you? There is more to it than not working set hours and times as GS says. Work your way through the HMRC link that was supplied. Read the HMRC manual if you are really interested.

I was replying to your comment to GS that the accountant was correct and GS was not their employer. I am not sure how you are qualified to make that decision. No one can possibly say if GS's situation is an employee one based on the information suppled. There is simply not enough information.
Click to expand...

I made the assumption that neither Goldenstar nor her accountants are idiots. Just to check, I asked if the people were employed for a fixed set of hours, and she replied no as I expected. I therefore believe that they are not employees, as she is clear herself that they are not, and as her accountants tell her that they are not.

Perhaps next time you tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about, you could clarify which part of my post you are disagreeing with? Because it read as if you were disagreeing that the OP is an employee, and from the information she has given surely there is no doubt about that whatsoever?

Thanks, but i don't need to read up on being self employed . I was happily self employed for ten years before I retired :).
 
ycbm said:
I made the assumption that neither Goldenstar nor her accountants are idiots. Just to check, I asked if the people were employed for a fixed set of hours, and she replied no as I expected. I therefore believe that they are not employees, as she is clear herself that they are not, and as her accountants tell her that they are not.

Perhaps next time you tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about, you could clarify which part of my post you are disagreeing with? Because it read as if you were disagreeing that the OP is an employee, and from the information she has given surely there is no doubt about that whatsoever?

Thanks, but i don't need to read up on being self employed . I was happily self employed for ten years before I retired :).
Click to expand...

sorry but I did include your comment "then as your accountants confirm you are not their employer." That was what I was replying to. It is dangerous to give advice without asking sufficient questions on matters such as employed/self employed status disputes. I have no idea if GS's grooms are employed or self employed so I don't see how you have. Whilst someone may be clear their "staff" are self employed that may not in fact be the case when it is examined in detail.

I am sure the OP is probably employed as indeed are many of the self employed grooms. Each case however has to be considered taking all facts into account.
 
NooNoo59 said:
Also we had agreed payment date of the 28th of the month and today is the 28th and he has not paid me! I suppose as I am not on a contract I can leave when I like
Click to expand...

To me, you should present an invoice with the agreed time for payment.

If you want to be paid on the 28th, I assume any invoice which is outstanding on that date will be paid. I would also present the invoice re stating that it is due for payment on or before the 28th inst [of this month], and I would insist on having it paid by bank transfer, so you can look at your statement on the 28th inst, and challenge him if it is not paid. Cheques are, of course just bits of paper, highly risky, and not transparent. He could be writing anything on the cheque stub, and it could be coming out of any account, there is not a true audit trail, imho.
What you are saying is that his last invoice is outstanding, if you are S/E, you don't "leave", that is an expression used by someone who is employed.
 
Last edited:
PS, at its simplest, a contract is an agreement between two parties, its really nothing to do with employment, however, in the UK, employment law insists on a Contract of Employment, and that is where you may be confused.
I love these posts, they are a recurrent theme on HHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top