Re: The problem with linkedIn is
"I first deleted all info from my profile"
So you think.
40413 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"Chief Digital Officers are considered both the new stars of the C-suite as well as faddish or transitory roles which will eventually go away.
The CIO show also noted that two years ago the average UK salary for one of these faddish transitories was £114,750, meaning tight-fisted Khan is underpaying by a good few grand once inflation is taken into account."
Maybe the roles are already starting to go away and the salary reflects this. I don't think I'll bother applying - it would probably mean living in London.
Would one be able to build a new program and run in within this locked down environment? If not that excludes it from being used in any trendy coding classes.
Oops. I forgot. Coding classes are writing bits of HTML these days. That's what all the celebs and BBC tech correspondents do in coding classes so it must be right.
Perhaps a when a senior civil servant takes charge of a major project they should be blocked from moving on until it's complete - except, of course on being sacked for incompetence or on retirement. That might give project managers a sense of urgency. It might also result in what would be big projects being split into chunks under the major project limit, chunks which might then be of manageable size capable of being delivered.
The game of musical chairs starts as one Permanent Secretary moves on ... We do we , the public, just accept that "Cabinet reshuffle" is a thing?
These are two different things. A Perm Sec is a civil servant not a minister and a Cabinet reshuffle affects ministers. What's permanent about a Perm Sec is that they don't lose their jobs in an election. However senior civil servants can get shifted round so although their rank is permanent their assignment isn't.
"How long have you been your last 3 jobs Mr X?", "Oh about 3-6 months each."
Assuming you were working through a limited company in your case it sounds as if you should have answered "about 7 years". Your job is with your employer and that's your limited company. Your company's contracts may be 3-6 months. Imagine if you applied your logic to a shop employee. Would you answer "about 30 seconds"?
"And it means that we have to place huge burdens on small employers (proportionally much higher than big employers) to administrate all the various things such as Employers NI, "
Employer's NI is, of course, only one part of what they administer. Employee's NI and Income Tax are others. But you need these taxes to pay for your UI. You still need to construct an entire workable system which ensures that there's sufficient resources to pay your UI. Simply replacing one mess with another doesn't cut it. I think you're quite rightly looking at UC and saying it's a mess but part of the problem is that it's a messy component of something that's better described as a shambles than a system and simply replacing that component doesn't make it less of a shambles.
"But when does a key man clause in a contract for services become a non-substitution clause that marks the contract as a disguised employment contract?"
The difference with a typical services engagement is that the people covered by "key man" clauses are bona fide employees of the company delivering the services, with NICs, income tax, sick pay and holidays fully accounted for.
A company is a company to paraphrase someone or other irrespective of size. Therefore there should be no reason to take a substitution clause as equivalent to a key man clause.
The primary problem with IR35 determination is that although it's supposed to be based on the balance of probabilities it doesn't consider the probability of the contract being what it states itself to be, a contract for provision of services. If a clause would be unexceptional in a contract with, say Capita, for provision of services then it should be equally unexceptional in a contract with VerySmallFreelanceCo. And that goes with "as directed", long contracts or any other clause. Why should the individual service provider be discriminated against relative to the Capitas of this world?
The entire assumption of IR35 is that there is such a thing as a disguised employee. And yet if you take into account the way in which the freelancer relates to the engager it differs in many respects from an employee. If a freelancer is asked - or told - to work on such and such a task today does that make him an employee? You think so? OK, you engage a sparky to change a single socket for a double in your living room; does that make him an employee because you told him which particular socket to change?
"Universal income is often dismissed as a socialist utopia"
Unless you have a plan to finance it it's not even that. Simply saying "universal income" on its own isn't enough. It can only be one element of a more complex financial system. What else do you propose to complete it?
"which is the resident monopolist agent between supplier & customer"
This is where your argument fails. Ebay isn't a monopolist. You can use Amazon market place, you can set up your own website, you can sell door to door, rent a shop or a market stall. You have options. Choosing to sell through Ebay is simply taking a ready made route and grumbling about it.
"Not in the US. I'm an independent contractor and I have a clause in my contract that says no substitutions."
That's an interesting situation. It seems to be established in UK case law that that would be an indication of employment. And yet the IR themselves, as they then were, had a sample contract on their website at one time for companies to supply services to themselves. It made provision for them (a "key man" clause) to nominate individuals on the suppliers team who could not be replaced without the IR's agreement. It was a sensible clause given the tendency of big services company to put forward a high powered team to make the pitch and then run the contracts on recent graduates, YTS trainees or work experience kids if they could get away with it. But when does a key man clause in a contract for services become a non-substitution clause that marks the contract as a disguised employment contract?
"Employed" - you work for someone else in "their" company (either full time or part time)
"Self-employed" - you work for "your own" company (even if providing services to someone elses company)
No. Self-employed is a fairly specific thing however much the HMRC try to muddy the waters.
If you're self-employed you can provide a service or trade goods and the money that the customer pays is your personal money. You may, however, have liabilities such as tax and NI and the ability to set your expenses against the income before taxes are levied. You'll also have liabilities for any other costs you incur and those liabilities fall directly on you, personally. You are the business; there's no distinction. You could, for instance, buy a bucket, a ladder and some cleaning materials and set up as a self employed window-cleaner tomorrow. If nobody wants their windows cleaned or you go on holiday or fall sick, tough. There's no money coming in and your only fall-back is on the dole under whatever name it's going ATM.
What I've just described is a sole trader. Another variation is a partnership. You can go into partnership with someone else with two buckets and two ladders as a window cleaning partnership. Much the same applies. Any money you take becomes your joint property as partners and it's up to you to divvy it up but you still have personal liabilities. In fact those liabilities are on both of you for the actions of either - your partner screws up and you could still be liable for whatever it costs.
An employee doesn't receive money that's paid for the whatever the business delivers. The business, whether it be a sole trader, a partnership, a limited company, a PLC, a charity or a public sector receives the money and pays the employee. The employee will have to pay income tax and NI although the NI rates are different and there's also an employer's NI to be paid. The employer will also have to find sick pay and holiday pay. The business and the employee are two separate entities. One thing that should be made clear here is that if you're in business as a self-employed window cleaner the your customers are just that, customers; they're not your employers.
There's no real obstacle to a company engaging a specialist worker (to use a generic term) on a self-employed basis. There is, however, a risk and that's a ruling some time ago that if the sole trader were to default on tax payments the IR (as it then was) could look to the engager (again, to use a generic term) to make good. This, AIUI, was what brought the limited company freelancer to the fore; clients were more likely to be comfortable dealing with a limited company rather than a sole-trader as the ruling did not apply to a worker engaged on that basis. It's not essential to structure the arrangement through a limited company. I came across a client who, I discovered, engaged graphic designers as sole traders and they actually had their own form contract for this.
It should be clear from the above that when a freelancer works through a limited company they are not self-employed. It is the company that is the business that receives payment from the client. The company has its own tax liabilities such as corporation tax and employees NI and its own rules about expenses. It's up to the company's management and ownership (who are probably identical with the employee(s)) to decide what payments it makes to its employee(s), subject, of course, to any limits on what it can afford and company legislation about solvency. It also needs to distribute salary payments through sickness, holidays and slack periods. As a company, of course, the business is subject to a good deal more legislation than the sole trader. It needs to go through the necessary legal formalities to be incorporated and it needs to produce the appropriate annual accounts to submit to Companies House. It has more freedom to distribute income as dividends, which have their own taxation arrangements, as well as salary and to retain some of its income when things are going well in order to be able to make payments when they're not. It is also the company which assumes any liabilities and not the employees.
For a small company the same person might be shareholder, management and employee. Nevertheless they are separate roles unlike the sole trader where the person is the business.
NB Occupations which are regulated create exceptions. Anyone can set up as a self-employed window cleaner but not as a self-employed medical practitioner unless they have the appropriate qualifications and registrations. OTOH there may be instances where the professional is obliged to bear personal liability even if they are an employee although the employer may pay for professional liability insurance.
"IR35 is to stop the tax dodging bastards"
If you think it's just a tax dodging wheeze why aren't you taking advantage of it yourself? Would it offend your moral principles or don't you fancy the risk of stepping off the edge of permie status? If the latter then you might like to reconsider and wonder if may there's something in this notion of freelancers being businesses and being a business not the same as being employed?
"Build a distro that appeals to the young, is easy to use"
IBM aren't in that market at all. They sold their desktop business, their Intel server business and their small printer business years ago. They're now mainframes, mid-range and services. They do, however, have their own server distro for mainframes. I'm not sure appealing to the young would help that.
"I would love to see someone putting a Raspberry Pi into a laptop of the same quality and at the same price point."
Actually the Pi is a more like a pig's ear when it comes to fitting into a box like that. It's designed as a bench top gadget* where it doesn't matter where the external connections are placed You need to get a USB connection out for the keyboard but because all the USBs are at one end it then becomes a compromise arranging for external USB kit to be plugged it. It would be even worse if you also wanted an internal disk drive.
OTOH something of similar spec but designed for incorporation in a laptop would be fine.
*At which it's brilliant, of course.
"That Horrid shade of green is off-putting as Hell!"
They're selling something kids will want, not you. When I bought one as a present I'd have preferred the grey but couldn't get it. It turned out that the acid green was just what the recipient wanted. I think we have to accept that they know their market.
"I suggest a real rationalisation would be for Canonical to effectively end game it's 'proprietary' desktop, ... to back one of the variants as the preferred mainstream business/enterprise desktop; an obvious candidate would be the Mint distribution with the Cinnamon desktop."
But Mint is a derivative of Ubuntu. If Ubuntu were to discontinue development of the desktop to replace it as a derivative of Mint then they'd be going round in circles.
"The problem with Linux is that it isn't very good. Windows is much better and actually works."
I see you don't use Linux. Remember that those of us who do somehow seem to end up as Windows support for friends and family so unlike you we have a basis for making a comparison.
"it's a load of old balls"
Indeed. And it's you who's talking it.
"unfair management practices – like passing people over for promotion"
'Twas ever thus. I quit on this basis over 30 years ago. Odd that as soon as I handed in my notice I was offered a promotion without any of the formalities that normally ruled in that organisation, right out of the normal annual cycle and without the normal promotion board. Things don't change. If employers think they can get away with being cheapskates they will. They're helped if their employees have a very niche skill set with not much competition from other employers.
For employees the answer is to develop a second, less niche skill set if you can. That and an FU fund.
"The IR35 changes have not a lot to do with HMRC collecting more revenue...it takes politics and vested interests to screw things up."
In this case, at least originally, Labour party politics and trade union vested interests. Freelancers don't join unions. By trying to shift them into permies the unions would hope to drag them into membership.
Computers in reprographic shops are likely to get clogged up with toner dust. We had a SCO server in a remote site in client's premises in London. If I had to do any work on it which required taking down a floppy disk I also took a spare drive. I think the only reason the QIC drive survived was because it always had a tape in it.
The end came when the lad who ran the shop rung up to say the ceiling had just fallen down and there was plaster all over his desk. After that we relocated the operation off-site.