When news of the Government’s consultation on existing legislation around false self-employment broke, we expected that it would attract debate within our regulation-heavy industry. Shortly after we published our blog post on the issue, we received numerous responses proving what we already knew; that the recruitment sector is home to an unrivalled depth of knowledge and experience which the Government and its advisors would be wise to tap into before making legislation that inevitably needs to be adapted.
For many, developing this expertise wasn’t necessarily a choice, it was a matter of necessity when faced with the ever-changing legislative landscape of recruitment. In our case, as brand guardians for our clients, we place huge emphasis on understanding the complexities of new regulations and ensuring they are adhered to from both a legal and ethical perspective. A particularly vibrant discussion was sparked by our blog post on LinkedIn, and revealed just how engaged our industry’s representatives are with the reality of these issues.
Steve Thomas, Director at Payco Services, began the thread with a highly valid point around the terminology that surrounds the latest Government consultation. The lack of an industry-accepted standard on the semantics that define recruitment has been a concern of ours for some time, as it can lead to so much unnecessary confusion on the main topic of conversation. Steve noted that even the title of the Government consultation, containing the phrase “false self-employment”, is a potentially misleading one, as self-employment is not currently defined in law. In fact, it is a transitory concept because “employment has been defined very simply in law and has been fleshed out over many years of case law.”
Tom Atkinson, Chairman at Simplicity and owner of Keen Thinking Ltd, agreed that a clear definition on false self-employment is absolutely essential. In the meantime, he stated that there is a concern that lawyers will be working around the “legal ambiguity” which the current legislation creates, without actually achieving the intended results of the law. Another concern that Tom shares with many in the recruitment industry is that last-minute changes will continue to be applied to the regulations, right up until the date of enforcement, leaving those affected with little time to make the necessary arrangements.
For Crichton Miller, Director at Artifice Solutions Ltd and Chairman at Haul-it Nationwide Ltd, the consultation is a welcome move in a “long overdue clean-up” of practices which exist purely for the purpose of avoiding tax. Despite this, Crichton also expressed a common view that poor choices are often made in selecting people to make business decisions that are later enforced by the Government. Those working within the recruitment industry are often well aware of the real ramifications of employment law, but these are not necessarily fully understood by policy makers themselves.
A conclusion to the matter feels a long way off, but what is clear is that opening the door to debate and conversation around existing and pending legislation is a welcome move. The consultation on onshore employment intermediaries: false self-employmentremains open until 4th February and we will be closely monitoring the outcome.
