Should I/can I report this?

I wouldn’t expect much to be done.
I know an employer (non-equine) who has all her staff on a ‘self-employed’ basis, yet dictates their hours and pay. She persuades people to go self employed by telling them they’ll get more in the long run by not declaring their earnings as “hardly anyone does”. She employs young, often vulnerable people and treats them like dirt. She has been reported numerous times but nothing ever happens.
It’s been an eye opener to me to see how some people just get away with things.
 
The IR35 rules are very open for interpretation. Where I work we have a few contractors who work along side full time paye staff. They provide their own insurance and tools. We expect a minimum of 40hrs from them at times that suit us. As a business we fall outside the rulings (and check yearly with our accountants to ensure). I would assume most livery yards do too.
In our industry its very common practice. A large local company has just been in the papers for 'laying off' all their contractors just before Xmas. Unions are involved, but that's the nature of the beast if your contracting you are the first to go when the work dries up.
 
EternalVetBills said:
I have just been in touch with a potential employer whom has asked me to work a 5 day, 40 hours, fixed schedule week, as a freelancer.
I obviously politely explained why that would not be viable for me, nor would it be remotely legal. However I am slightly worried that someone younger or more gullible than I would accept this, and not realise that they are not protected by employment law, for sick pay, unfair dismissal ect.

So my question is, do people think I should report this? The employer is advertising it as a 'full-time' position. If I should report it, who to? I am a member of the BGA, do I contact them?
Click to expand...
Goes on all the time
 
scats said:
I wouldn’t expect much to be done.
I know an employer (non-equine) who has all her staff on a ‘self-employed’ basis, yet dictates their hours and pay. She persuades people to go self employed by telling them they’ll get more in the long run by not declaring their earnings as “hardly anyone does”. She employs young, often vulnerable people and treats them like dirt. She has been reported numerous times but nothing ever happens.
It’s been an eye opener to me to see how some people just get away with things.
Click to expand...
it does go on all the time and maybe nothing will be done and people do get away with things. Resources are limited. Of course there should be more and a very robust approach.
However people will never know if anything was done. It could be HMRC have dealt with the employer/business and are satisfied with the situation. It may be they have not done anything yet but are biding their time. Non compliance with the operation of PAYE (ie treating workers as employees) will often indicate non compliance elsewhere usually in the accounts in the form of tax evasion (not declaring all income or in many other ways) or on their own personal self assessment (tax returns) and or VAT.

As for the "self employed" workers not declaring their earnings then if HMRC investigate they will see a deduction in the accounts for "wages" They will look to see if there is a PAYE scheme. If not they will ask for a list of names, addresses and amounts. No list no deduction for "wages" so the employer/business will provide it even if it drops the workers in it. The list will be checked to make sure all those "workers" are at least registered as self employed and making returns of their income. Some of them may not be so then they will be "welcomed" into the club resulting in a tax bill,, interest and even a penalty.
 
Out of curiosity, and on the subject of freelancing and employment law. If a freelancer is asked to do specific days & times each week, e.g
Mon & Wed & Fri pm, should that be a p/t employee? Rather than freelance or is it a grey area?

(I'm asking after a chat with a friend in a different industry)
 
It's difficult to give a definitive answer because all sorts of things make up the whole picture of whether somebody is self employed or not, but what you describe certainly points towards employment as it demonstrates control by the engager. One of the questions in the HMRC CEST tool is whether the worker decides their hours or whether the engager does.
 
It can be quite complicated. I might be asked to do certain days because those are when other people I need to liaise with are available or it's a quiet day for the business so they'd rather you work on the system that day and affect fewer users.

I suppose the difference is in theory, I can say sorry can't do that and we either find another time or I don't do the job. If you're employed that's not an option. The reality is that I would always try and accommodate a client and wouldn't want them to go elsewhere so it's not a much of a choice as first appears.
 
YourValentine said:
Out of curiosity, and on the subject of freelancing and employment law. If a freelancer is asked to do specific days & times each week, e.g
Mon & Wed & Fri pm, should that be a p/t employee? Rather than freelance or is it a grey area?

(I'm asking after a chat with a friend in a different industry)
Click to expand...
It’s a grey area, and to an extent depends on what test is used. The HMRC test of ‘employee’ is tighter (in my experience the HMRC are keen to find that someone should be employed).
The test from a tribunal perspective is a judgement based on three elements
  • Control - how much say does the person have in how they carry out the work
  • Right of substitution - if you’ve agreed to do work are you personally required to do it or can you provide a suitable person to do the work on your behalf?
  • Mutuality of obligation - and this is the test most likely to apply to your scenario. How obliged are you to do the work at specific times. The person should be able to accept or decline hours to suit their business availability.

Generally if both parties are happy and the arrangement is fair and reasonable there won’t be a challenge. To be self employed as a service provider people need to be able to build up a portfolio of jobs, have some freedom to accept/decline hours, and get enough payment to cover the costs of correctly employing themselves (holiday, insurance, pension, training, equipment, tax, NI etc) and have the ability to set themselves up properly (ie accounts, tax returns etc). Many of the ‘bad’ arrangements try to avoid these and basically pay the minimum with no allowance for the true costs of employment. This means the worker is underpaid, doesn’t have insurance, isn’t protected by risk assessment and mitigation, isn’t trained etc.

In summary, self employment can be a good solution IF it is done correctly.
 
Denali said:
I would say something but that’s me and my experience in the US where yard owners like to blur the lines of independent contractors to get out of paying workers compensation insurance, offering insurance, etc.

Shockingly some of the “employees” are okay with this because of WHO they work for and insist the average salary is close to six figures.

No harm in reporting the situation. Sadly the equine industry will be dragged kicking and screaming into the real world of business.

Never mind people in the US are so blinded by horses sometimes that Cesar Parra and his holding passports hostage is the line in the sand for people. Mean while it’s been known for at least 25 years he’s a scuzz ball. But ya know people are going see what they want to see.
Click to expand...
Rules are different in the USA? I went on a riding holiday and all the "employees" were interns and the customers gave them a tip - about $300 if I remember right.

The "self employed" employee has been a common thing, but the rules and regulations have tightened up, which for the employee is a very good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top