Umbrella companies your employer

gesdt50

Many of the bigger companies like Cbre, Wates group, Mitie will use an Umbrella company as your stated employer; having been through the masher I only released after finally reading through all the T&c's some years ago now and having discussed it with some fellow agency workers that were also doing temp to  perm positions they had no idea; these temp to perm positions almost never materialize as the big companies will string the so called temp to perm workers on probation for 3 months out along and then just get rid of then after 6 months and all the ways up 2 years  of using where the worker would have then earned 2 year protection for Constructive dismissal. The companies benefit by doing this in many ways as they can launder money through the temporary workers (they don't actually need a shop front to act as a laundry business) so its another step away from HMRC -the companies also won't have to pay honour what these companies do when they tell you, you will earn an extra days holiday for every year extra you work up to about 8 or maybe 12 years; they will effectively keep kicking the ladder out from under you so your always kept in a place of weakness whilst they exploit non informed short-term workers. Is this legal inside IR35?

DullGreyGuy

gesdt50 said:

Many of the bigger companies like Cbre, Wates group, Mitie will use an Umbrella company as your stated employer; having been through the masher I only released after finally reading through all the T&c's some years ago now and having discussed it with some fellow agency workers that were also doing temp to  perm positions they had no idea; these temp to perm positions almost never materialize as the big companies will string the so called temp to perm workers on probation for 3 months out along and then just get rid of then after 6 months and all the ways up 2 years  of using where the worker would have then earned 2 year protection for Constructive dismissal. The companies benefit by doing this in many ways as they can launder money through the temporary workers (they don't actually need a shop front to act as a laundry business) so its another step away from HMRC -the companies also won't have to pay honour what these companies do when they tell you, you will earn an extra days holiday for every year extra you work up to about 8 or maybe 12 years; they will effectively keep kicking the ladder out from under you so your always kept in a place of weakness whilst they exploit non informed short-term workers. Is this legal inside IR35?

They dont need to use an umbrella to be able to dismiss people easily in the first 2 years of employment. Depending on the company, industry etc there can be reasons why its beneficial for them to use off payroll resources rather than FTCs but mainly its just to move half the HR headaches to another company.

How do you think they are laundering money? What money is coming back into them clean from the employee? Employee/Temp salaries tend to be a one way flow!

You arent giving any evidence of them not honouring the earning extra days holidays, are you just saying they release people before they have to? Ultimately thats no different to releasing a load of people just before bonus pay season. You could argue its underhanded but doesnt mean they are not honouring an agreement.

Having high turnover of staff is very expensive... a former CPO (before People Officer was a title) wrote a published paper on the fact it costs a business 100%-200% of the employees fully loaded salary when they walk out the door. I doubt the value is that high personally but there are a lot of costs in terms of hiring process/fees, training people, paying overtime to cover the shifts, moral, productivity as they learn the ropes etc. A company would be very foolish to avoid giving 1 days holiday but take on all the other costs of trying to find a replacement

Marcon

Do you actually understand how umbrella companies work? See https://www.litrg.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/LITRG-Factsheet-working-through-an-umbrella-company.pdf

Grumpy_chap

DullGreyGuy said:

it costs a business 100%-200% of the employees fully loaded salary when they walk out the door. I doubt the value is that high personally 

I can quote believe that figure.  It may even be too low.
When I previously had to recruit, for some roles, the agency fee alone would amount to a full year's salary.
Plus the induction / ramp up period, covering the gap, etc., etc.

mcpitman

gesdt50 said:

Many of the bigger companies like Cbre, Wates group, Mitie will use an Umbrella company as your stated employer; having been through the masher I only released after finally reading through all the T&c's some years ago now and having discussed it with some fellow agency workers that were also doing temp to  perm positions they had no idea; these temp to perm positions almost never materialize as the big companies will string the so called temp to perm workers on probation for 3 months out along and then just get rid of then after 6 months and all the ways up 2 years  of using where the worker would have then earned 2 year protection for Constructive dismissal. The companies benefit by doing this in many ways as they can launder money through the temporary workers (they don't actually need a shop front to act as a laundry business) so its another step away from HMRC -the companies also won't have to pay honour what these companies do when they tell you, you will earn an extra days holiday for every year extra you work up to about 8 or maybe 12 years; they will effectively keep kicking the ladder out from under you so your always kept in a place of weakness whilst they exploit non informed short-term workers. Is this legal inside IR35?

There's some wild and leftfield accusations and theories in the above.

I think you need to research umbrella companies, what they do, how they do it and what they charge for.

gesdt50

DullGreyGuy said:

gesdt50 said:

Many of the bigger companies like Cbre, Wates group, Mitie will use an Umbrella company as your stated employer; having been through the masher I only released after finally reading through all the T&c's some years ago now and having discussed it with some fellow agency workers that were also doing temp to  perm positions they had no idea; these temp to perm positions almost never materialize as the big companies will string the so called temp to perm workers on probation for 3 months out along and then just get rid of then after 6 months and all the ways up 2 years  of using where the worker would have then earned 2 year protection for Constructive dismissal. The companies benefit by doing this in many ways as they can launder money through the temporary workers (they don't actually need a shop front to act as a laundry business) so its another step away from HMRC -the companies also won't have to pay honour what these companies do when they tell you, you will earn an extra days holiday for every year extra you work up to about 8 or maybe 12 years; they will effectively keep kicking the ladder out from under you so your always kept in a place of weakness whilst they exploit non informed short-term workers. Is this legal inside IR35?

They dont need to use an umbrella to be able to dismiss people easily in the first 2 years of employment. Depending on the company, industry etc there can be reasons why its beneficial for them to use off payroll resources rather than FTCs but mainly its just to move half the HR headaches to another company.

How do you think they are laundering money? What money is coming back into them clean from the employee? Employee/Temp salaries tend to be a one way flow!

You arent giving any evidence of them not honouring the earning extra days holidays, are you just saying they release people before they have to? Ultimately thats no different to releasing a load of people just before bonus pay season. You could argue its underhanded but doesnt mean they are not honouring an agreement.

Having high turnover of staff is very expensive... a former CPO (before People Officer was a title) wrote a published paper on the fact it costs a business 100%-200% of the employees fully loaded salary when they walk out the door. I doubt the value is that high personally but there are a lot of costs in terms of hiring process/fees, training people, paying overtime to cover the shifts, moral, productivity as they learn the ropes etc. A company would be very foolish to avoid giving 1 days holiday but take on all the other costs of trying to find a replacement

Of course they dont need to use an Umbrella to easily or for any reason at all get rid of someone because they dont like they look of them or they are having a  bad morning because someone upset them on their way to work; they can tell yoiu after 4 minutes or 4 seconds of giving you a task to do leave your not wanted lawfully even if you have just spent 3 hours getting to the workplace

If a company launders just 1% 0r 1.23% or 6%  of the monies they or associated its still money laundering and profit for the disreputable compoany it dosnt have to be 100% profit and indeed would make sense for it not to be so high as to draw unwanted attention.

"Having high turnover of staff is very expensive." Most of the companies I have worked would rather be right in their biased wrong  assessment of an employee and get rid of them or demote them to their egos end than stand corrected and put up

General_Grant

gesdt50 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

gesdt50 said:

Many of the bigger companies like Cbre, Wates group, Mitie will use an Umbrella company as your stated employer; having been through the masher I only released after finally reading through all the T&c's some years ago now and having discussed it with some fellow agency workers that were also doing temp to  perm positions they had no idea; these temp to perm positions almost never materialize as the big companies will string the so called temp to perm workers on probation for 3 months out along and then just get rid of then after 6 months and all the ways up 2 years  of using where the worker would have then earned 2 year protection for Constructive dismissal. The companies benefit by doing this in many ways as they can launder money through the temporary workers (they don't actually need a shop front to act as a laundry business) so its another step away from HMRC -the companies also won't have to pay honour what these companies do when they tell you, you will earn an extra days holiday for every year extra you work up to about 8 or maybe 12 years; they will effectively keep kicking the ladder out from under you so your always kept in a place of weakness whilst they exploit non informed short-term workers. Is this legal inside IR35?

They dont need to use an umbrella to be able to dismiss people easily in the first 2 years of employment. Depending on the company, industry etc there can be reasons why its beneficial for them to use off payroll resources rather than FTCs but mainly its just to move half the HR headaches to another company.

How do you think they are laundering money? What money is coming back into them clean from the employee? Employee/Temp salaries tend to be a one way flow!

You arent giving any evidence of them not honouring the earning extra days holidays, are you just saying they release people before they have to? Ultimately thats no different to releasing a load of people just before bonus pay season. You could argue its underhanded but doesnt mean they are not honouring an agreement.

Having high turnover of staff is very expensive... a former CPO (before People Officer was a title) wrote a published paper on the fact it costs a business 100%-200% of the employees fully loaded salary when they walk out the door. I doubt the value is that high personally but there are a lot of costs in terms of hiring process/fees, training people, paying overtime to cover the shifts, moral, productivity as they learn the ropes etc. A company would be very foolish to avoid giving 1 days holiday but take on all the other costs of trying to find a replacement

Of course they dont need to use an Umbrella to easily or for any reason at all get rid of someone because they dont like they look of them or they are having a  bad morning because someone upset them on their way to work; they can tell yoiu after 4 minutes or 4 seconds of giving you a task to do leave your not wanted lawfully even if you have just spent 3 hours getting to the workplace

If a company launders just 1% 0r 1.23% or 6%  of the monies they or associated its still money laundering and profit for the disreputable compoany it dosnt have to be 100% profit and indeed would make sense for it not to be so high as to draw unwanted attention.

"Having high turnover of staff is very expensive." Most of the companies I have worked would rather be right in their biased wrong  assessment of an employee and get rid of them or demote them to their egos end than stand corrected and put up

What is your definition of "money laundering"?

DullGreyGuy

gesdt50 said:
Of course they dont need to use an Umbrella to easily or for any reason at all get rid of someone because they dont like they look of them or they are having a  bad morning because someone upset them on their way to work; they can tell yoiu after 4 minutes or 4 seconds of giving you a task to do leave your not wanted lawfully even if you have just spent 3 hours getting to the workplace

So what is your allegation about umbrellas then?

gesdt50 said:

If a company launders just 1% 0r 1.23% or 6%  of the monies they or associated its still money laundering and profit for the disreputable compoany it dosnt have to be 100% profit and indeed would make sense for it not to be so high as to draw unwanted attention.

I'm starting to think you dont know what money laundering is...

Where do you think Wates Group gets it proceeds of crime money from?
Why do you think an umbrella company helps to launder it?

Are you implying Wates Group owns the umbrella and so their £3 a week fee is laundering?