Contractors, good or bad?

[helimutt]

What say you?

Are contractors a good thing for a company or an expense they could do without, and, using forward planning, employ up to 2 full time salaried people for less money instead of paying these exorbitant daily rates and expenses for people who can walk away whenever they want??

[airborne_artist]

The contractor has no security, and has to provide his/her own insurance, pension, leave etc.

And since when has fair had anything to do with it?

Worth noting that you changed your original post a few minutes later, and as I was composing my reply. What I've replied to is not what is now in your post.

[Whirlygig]

Contractors can be "released" whenever the employer wants whereas a full-time employee cannot be made redundant that easily. Please bear in mind that employees are never redundant, it's the job that's redundant.

To prove redundancy, one must not have employed anyone in the same or similar role within the previous 6 months or employ anyone for a year after, otherwise wrongful redundancy could be proved. Forward planning is not easy, especially in the business sector to which you are referring. If it is, please tell me whether I should do my IR next year to get a NS job or not.

When looking at someone's salary, the cost to the company will be much greater. Factor in 20 days holiday, 8 days bank holiday, let's say 10 days sick, pension, insurances, National Insurance at 12.8%, plus any other benefits. If you want to get rid of an employee and they have not been naughty do disciplinary action is not possible, then it's down to breaking the employment contract, sacking them and paying them off via a compromise agreement. This will normally involve solicitors and and employer would have to pay at at least a year's salary as compensation.

Contractors on the other hand (and I am one!!) need to charge more than a salary to ameliorate the employment risk that they are taking instead of the employer bearing that risk.

A business only exists to make a profit for its shareholders; anything else is incidental. If a business feels that staff welfare and a motivated workforce will help generate more profit, then that is the strategy that the company will adopt. If a business wants to run along ethical lines believing it will achieve a greater profit, then it will, otherwise it won't.

Cheers

Whirls

[Helinut]

Also need to look at the demand for the operator's services.

If you have a steady contract, say police or HEMS then employees make sense.

If you are in the ad hoc charter market, then it makes sense to have some "contractors" which you can ignore in the winter when work tails off, or for any other reason.

[Ships Cat]

Well said, Whirls, as a contractor I couldn't have put it better myself.:ok:

[FFF]

Contractors give flexibility, and that flexibility costs.
It can make perfect sense though if the work you need doing is only seasonal, in which case better to pay twice the employees salary amount for 3 months work to a contractor than the full 12 months to an employee.

Whirlygig, you said you are a contractor - do you prefer it that way, or would you rather have a steady salaried job (doing the same thing)?

FFF

[helimutt]

Airborne artist, I apologise for changing my original post but I re-read it and it sounded like sour grapes that they get 3X what I get a month for 3-6 less days per month. It wasn't meant to sound like that and I just wondered what people felt about it in their workplace. The contractors at our place just had a really tough 3 months as they had no a/c to fly so earned nothing!! Obviously they had the freedom to go elsewhere though during that time.

[Brilliant Stuff]

I knew of three contractors who were employees of a NS company who got made redundant on Friday with big pay off and then returned on Monday as a contractor and stayed contractors for at least another 2-3 years.

Company said to us "Be glad this way your jobs are safe and we don't have to make anyone redundant since we are running below the required strength"

Shame that this kind of behaviour also reduced the chances of promotion.

[CarryOnCopter]

Hello helimutt,

Had a think about your questions as I am a contractor.

Some company's have clients that give hardly any notice but might not use their helicopter for weeks on end so no point employing someone full time in that situation, company still get paid to be able to provide a pilot when client calls so good for company, or you have the charter company's that are either full on working or nothing is happening and everyone is praying so same again but not as happy as above.

In my little world to let down any of your clients is a one off event, ie no more work from client, have to work on a first come first serve basis even if the the second job offered is heaven compared to the first, as in any buisness you build up a client base and keep them happy, nice to have a choice in theory but not reality, you can't walk away and expect to walk back as a rule.

Good money for the pilot when it works, bad when it doesn't, company's use contractors as needed so only they know what is best for them and your the only one that knows if contracting is the best for you.