Subcontracting.

Andyaero

Is the following legit.....

One man cleaning business is getting inundated with more potential work than they can cope with, don't want to employ just yet as it's a new business.
If business owner charges client a fee and uses another self employed cleaner to do the work, that cleaner then invoices the contract owner their fee.
Job owner has no employment or tax obligations towards the subcontractor?
 ,

biscan25

Yes this is fine.
Remember if anything goes wrong though, the subcontractor has no contractual relationship with the end client, that is on the one man cleaning business.

Marcon

Andyaero said:

Is the following legit.....

One man cleaning business is getting inundated with more potential work than they can cope with, don't want to employ just yet as it's a new business.
If business owner charges client a fee and uses another self employed cleaner to do the work, that cleaner then invoices the contract owner their fee.
Job owner has no employment or tax obligations towards the subcontractor?
 ,

biscan25 said:

Yes this is fine.
Remember if anything goes wrong though, the subcontractor has no contractual relationship with the end client, that is on the one man cleaning business.

Not necessarily 'fine' at all if the subcontractor is deemed to be a 'worker', which may or may not be the case from what little OP has said. See https://www.gov.uk/employment-status/worker

Completely agree that if anything goes wrong, the comeback is against OP, not the person they send along to do the work.

Jillanddy

Marcon said:

Andyaero said:

Is the following legit.....

One man cleaning business is getting inundated with more potential work than they can cope with, don't want to employ just yet as it's a new business.
If business owner charges client a fee and uses another self employed cleaner to do the work, that cleaner then invoices the contract owner their fee.
Job owner has no employment or tax obligations towards the subcontractor?
 ,

biscan25 said:

Yes this is fine.
Remember if anything goes wrong though, the subcontractor has no contractual relationship with the end client, that is on the one man cleaning business.

Not necessarily 'fine' at all if the subcontractor is deemed to be a 'worker', which may or may not be the case from what little OP has said. See https://www.gov.uk/employment-status/worker

Completely agree that if anything goes wrong, the comeback is against OP, not the person they send along to do the work.

Actually - could be deemed an employee in law. The level of control the "subcontractor" would have appears to be little. They would go where they are told, when they are told, cannot simply send someone else when they wish to (and if the OP allowed that, that would be immensely risky - and imagine the clients views of just anyone rocking up whenever they want).. I can't see such an arrangement ever passing the tests for self-employment. The OP could land in an employment tribunal very quickly...And I can imagine HMRC might have a rather different view of the tax and NI obligations.

Andyaero

I work for a multinational supermarket group we use contractors for many maintenance tasks, say refrigeration deep cleans. They go to the site they are told, when they are told and the subcontractors work is checked by a manager within our organisation. The contractor, can contract that job out, but all the same checks have been done on their contractors and would be in store. What's the difference?

Marcon

Andyaero said:

I work for a multinational supermarket group we use contractors for many maintenance tasks, say refrigeration deep cleans. They go to the site they are told, when they are told and the subcontractors work is checked by a manager within our organisation. The contractor, can contract that job out, but all the same checks have been done on their contractors and would be in store. What's the difference?

Difference in what? The point under discussion here is a contractor's relationship with their sub-contractor, not the end user's relationship with the contractor.

Andyaero

So how can our contractors regularly subcontract out those jobs to another contractor without the initial contractor falling foul of the regulations?

Also going back to the initial question, if the cleaning company uses self employed cleaners, who also have their own clients, those cleaners organise their own times and dates of cleans with the client, provide their own equipment and clothing, what more could be done to show that they are sub contractors? It is surely allowed within the contractor/sub relationship that the contract owner has the right to vet any stand in company the sub would use as the contract owner is responsible for all works done?

Jillanddy

Andyaero said:

So how can our contractors regularly subcontract out those jobs to another contractor without the initial contractor falling foul of the regulations?

Also going back to the initial question, if the cleaning company uses self employed cleaners, who also have their own clients, those cleaners organise their own times and dates of cleans with the client, provide their own equipment and clothing, what more could be done to show that they are sub contractors? It is surely allowed within the contractor/sub relationship that the contract owner has the right to vet any stand in company the sub would use as the contract owner is responsible for all works done?

If you do that, then you are not a contractor - you are an employment agency, and those are regulated by law. 

In one post above you asked "What's the difference?" The answer is that if you don't know the difference, then you are on very shaky ground. Whatever relationship you attempt to form with people you employ, it is you who will bear the consequences - and potentially very serious consequences - if you get it wrong. Depending on people on an anonymous website to give you legal advice, no matter how knowledgeable they may be, is nothing except stupid. "I got my advice from a bunch of strangers on MSE" will not wash in any court of law.

And no, you do not have the right to "vet" (i.e. control) any stand-in that your "quite possibly an employee anyway" may send - if they are genuinely sub-contractors and self-employed they may send anyone they want and you have no control over that at all. The fact that they then choose to send Jack the Ripper or Butch Cassidy is your problem....

The other "What's the difference" is that your multinational supermarket is that you are not a multinational supermarket with a battalion of lawyers and other experts working to try to ensure that you remain inside the law (and not always succeeding at that either) or the resources to pay off anyone you unlawfully trample over including your customers. 

Andyaero

Ok, simple question then, is it possible in anyway for a cleaning company to use subcontractors?

From the answers above it appears I'm being told no, but I know of many who do, some small, some large (Maid2 Clean) are they acting illegally?
I'm not after a row, just info from other folks experience, amongst info I am receiving elsewhere.
Thanks.

Andyaero

"And no, you do not have the right to "vet" (i.e. control) any stand-in that your "quite possibly an employee anyway" may send - if they are genuinely sub-contractors and self-employed they may send anyone they want and you have no control over that at all. The fact that they then choose to send Jack the Ripper or Butch Cassidy is your

 problem...."

"vet" tho, does not mean control. It means to ensure that anyone working, that falls under my responsibility follows my expectations of conduct, h&s and general legalities. A Corporate Responsibility policy if you will? 
Surely that's more sensible than letting Jack the Ripper clean the windows?

Jillanddy

Andyaero said:

"And no, you do not have the right to "vet" (i.e. control) any stand-in that your "quite possibly an employee anyway" may send - if they are genuinely sub-contractors and self-employed they may send anyone they want and you have no control over that at all. The fact that they then choose to send Jack the Ripper or Butch Cassidy is your

 problem...."

"vet" tho, does not mean control. It means to ensure that anyone working, that falls under my responsibility follows my expectations of conduct, h&s and general legalities. A Corporate Responsibility policy if you will? 
Surely that's more sensible than letting Jack the Ripper clean the windows?

I repeat - if you do this you become an employment agency which is regulated by law. 

If you don't want to listen, that is fine. Do what you will, because the consequences are yours. But you are a "corporate" nothing, and if you want to act "responsibly" then you need to take appropriate paid for legal advice to cover and protect yourself, the people who work for you and your customers. Arguing that what people tell you probably isn't right because you don't want it to be, and want someone to tell you what you want to hear so that you can do that, isn't going to make what you are doing right or legal.