CITB Construction skills

villabadger

DCodd wrote: »

I would point out also that to gain access to any site that has a PLC as a main contractor (and most large Ltds too) requires the CITB's own CSCS cards and to gain one of those you need to prove your qualifications are valid and upto date.

Exactly! Most of our work is site work so all of the guys have to have their CSCS cards. To be able to qualify for the correct card (not Operative though) then they must have done the appropriate apprenticeship or NVQ. Therefore, as a sub-contractor they must ensure that they have the correct qualifications. So, why should I pay a training tax when I am already paying their invoices for services as they need to account for their training costs, not me?

Sambucus_Nigra

villabadger wrote: »

Really appreciate your reply - thanks.

I have no intention of registering but am interested in how I will be 'found out'.

What I find laughable is the section 'Legal Requirement' of the pdf mentioned earlier in the thread - it says....

The law states that all employers engaged wholly or mainly in construction industry activities must fill in a Levy Return each year. We can take legal action against employers who do not send us a completed Levy Return.

How can this be enforced if they don't actually tell you that the company may have to pay this tax? When a limited company is incorporated you declare the nature of business so there is no way that we hide what we do. Equally, there is no reason why the company isn't notified of this 'legal obligation'. The really funny thing is that we actually have the word 'construction' as part of our company name.:rotfl:

Apart from one person all of our labour is supplied by subbies. However, digging a little deeper into the available grants, most of the funds cannot be used for subbie training especially for skills that might actually benefit our company. What a complete load of bureacratic nonsense!:mad:

They may or may not find you - as LIBAD said, she got caught by signing up for apprentice grant...They also scour the yellow pages etc and will register you if they 'find' you.

You can get grants for anyone that is included on the levy form; and the best way to claim down grants for labour only sub contractors is to do a training plan; the rules of that also go to many pages long so knowing the ins and outs of that comes after working with them for years.

Sambucus_Nigra

DCodd wrote: »

|OK now that we can be confident that you do represent CITB can you confirm that plumbers are no longer within the scope of the CITB levy and if any trade supplies the main materials for their work, they can be removed from the total wages bill for the purposes of levy liability?

Also for my purposes can you confirm that AirCon works are not in scope and Mechanical & Electrical maintenance is not in scope?

Thanks

I doubt if the CITB will confirm anything on here to do with scope - as mentioned the rules and regs are at least 50 pages long. Also, it's to do with the work that the company does. So, a plumber who does a little general work won't be, but a general builder who also does plumbing will be as most of their work will be construction based. The CITB will tell you that each employer will be assessed once they complete the inital company assessment; which their levy dept will look at. And to do that, you will need to register.

DCodd

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

I doubt if the CITB will confirm anything on here to do with scope - as mentioned the rules and regs are at least 50 pages long. Also, it's to do with the work that the company does. So, a plumber who does a little general work won't be, but a general builder who also does plumbing will be as most of their work will be construction based. The CITB will tell you that each employer will be assessed once they complete the inital company assessment; which their levy dept will look at. And to do that, you will need to register.

So they are in direct opposition to the Government who state that plumbers and M&E companies are now expempt as the CITB do not provide training for them?

Sambucus_Nigra

DCodd wrote: »

So they are in direct opposition to the Government who state that plumbers and M&E companies are now expempt as the CITB do not provide training for them?

How are they in opposition?

Plumbers are not in scope, general builders for example who do a little plumbing will be in scope...it's the overall work of the company that determines scope.

DCodd

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

How are they in opposition?

Plumbers are not in scope, general builders for example who do a little plumbing will be in scope...it's the overall work of the company that determines scope.

You misunderstand my question, if a general builder employs a plumber then can the plumbers wages be deducted from the calculation for levy liability as plumbing operations are not in scope?

Sambucus_Nigra

No - they can't. Once they are in scope, the wages for the whole company are taken into consideration.

Unless you are a very large company and have 'come to an arrangement'

DCodd

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

No - they can't. Once they are in scope, the wages for the whole company are taken into consideration.

Unless you are a very large company and have 'come to an arrangement'

You see that is where they are in direct opposition, the statement is that for CITB (GB) plumbers are no longer in scope. It does not say unless they are employed by a builder, it just states that plumbers are not in scope and the final review report for CITB (NI) July 2009 states that CITB (NI) should be brought in line with CITB (GB).

villabadger

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

They may or may not find you - as LIBAD said, she got caught by signing up for apprentice grant...They also scour the yellow pages etc and will register you if they 'find' you.

You can get grants for anyone that is included on the levy form; and the best way to claim down grants for labour only sub contractors is to do a training plan; the rules of that also go to many pages long so knowing the ins and outs of that comes after working with them for years.

So is it a legal requirement or not? Do you have of view of their statement of this? What you appear to be saying is that an organisation has to comply if they are known about. Surely, if it is a legal requirement to submit a levy return then everyone has to abide by that. It seems to me that the approach is ar!e about face. If they want to be sure that they receive as much income as possible then they should capture everyone by default and then determine whether that tax is payable on a case by case basis. I just cannot see how this is enforcable by law if they adopt a 'hit and mis' approach.

As for the training, again, I don't see why training of subbies is my problem. If I need to employ a subbie then they have to prove that they have the necessary skills and experience to perform the required tasks. Effectively, I am hiring someone who has the skills. If they don't have them then I don't hire them. I do realise that inexperienced people need training and we do help by hiring some to give them on the job experience but ultimately it is down to them to gain suitable qualifications if they choose to do so. They might only work with us for a few weeks or months.

Sambucus_Nigra

No, because the argument would be that the company - being a general builder for example - are in scope and ALL their staff and labour only sub contractors would appear on the levy form. For example, secretaries aren't 'in scope' as a profession but are included on the levy form.

[It's not MY argument, so don't flame me!]...