We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

PAYE for contractor/casual worker

2»

Comments

  • Any wrote: »
    Hi guys,

    I need an advice on an issue I have not met before..

    A company has a casual contractor, who does jobs only as required for the company and invoices them. But now he wants the company to sort out his tax, as he cannot be bothered to work it out himself.

    Will the company then have to pay NI for him (company rate) as if he was normal employee?


    It might be easier to point him towards an umbrella company. He'll just submit a timesheet and the umbrella company will invoice, sort out the tax and NI etc and he can stay on the current rate.
    He doesn't have to sort out his own tax, company doesn't have to employ him and all he needs to do is sort out a time sheet and any expenses.
  • Savvy_Sue
    Savvy_Sue Posts: 47,441 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    noh wrote: »
    I have 2 casual zero hour contracts with different employers. Both explicitly state that I an not obliged to accept any work offered.
    Therefore, at least in my case, your statement is not correct.
    I have in the past turned down work from one employer in favour of the other who happens to pay more.
    I'm sure a canny employer could word it in such a way that the employee was only working when required (zero hours) but aware that turning work down too consistently would result in termination of contract, if that sounds better ...
    Signature removed for peace of mind
  • noh
    noh Posts: 5,817 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Savvy_Sue wrote: »
    I'm sure a canny employer could word it in such a way that the employee was only working when required (zero hours) but aware that turning work down too consistently would result in termination of contract, if that sounds better ...

    Possibly but both my contracts state similar terms which gives the impression that there may be a legal reason for the way they are worded maybe to provide a balance between the two parties.

    Here is the wording.

    "You are entitled to choose whether or not to accept any work offered you and the Company is not obliged to offer you any work. You are also free to accept work with any other organisation as you see fit"

    It is true that if work was turned down consistently they would probably stop offering, there would be no need to terminate the contract as they are not obliged to offer work.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.3K Life & Family
  • 258.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.