I would conver with IALPA on this also, the Irish legal system wll most likely side with you on this. Brookfield contracts and RYR forcing you to choose their accountants for contracting is dubious, in any case they won't pursue it.

No Ryanair pilot is a contractor. ALL are employed by Ryanair, no matter what any contract says.
False self employment is fraud and always commited by the employER, in this case Ryanair.
When a contract is illegal, the employER is liable, it does not matter that you signed. it is at all times the employER that needs to present a contract to the employee that is in accordance with EU legislation. EU legislation supercedes any dodgy Irish law by the way.
If FR barks too much at you, just threaten them to go Strasbourg with the issue.
The barking dog is in reality limp and sick. And its agression is a sign of Ryanair knowing it is on the brink of downfall due to their own fraudulous doings.

Unconscionable Contract Clauses

Unconscionability (also known as unconscientious dealings in Australia) is a term used in contract law to describe a defense against the enforcement of a contract based on the presence of terms that are excessively unfair to one party. Typically, such a contract is held to be unenforceable because the consideration offered is lacking or is so obviously inadequate that to enforce the contract would be unfair to the party seeking to escape the contract.
In and of itself, inadequate consideration is likely not enough to make a contract unenforceable. However, a court of law will consider evidence that one party to the contract took advantage of its superior bargaining power to insert provisions that make the agreement overwhelmingly favor the interests of that party.

Unconscionability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How are the Ryanair pilots situation compared to the definition of being employee or self-employed?
In the company I work for we are engaged through the agency and have no limited company. I can answer yes to all questions under "employee", so I wonder how legal the contracts are?


As a general guide as to whether a worker is an employee or self-employed; if the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following questions, then the worker is probably an employee:

• Do they have to do the work themselves?
• Can someone tell them at any time what to do, where to carry out the work or when and how to do it?
• Can they work a set amount of hours?
• Can someone move them from task to task?
• Are they paid by the hour, week, or month?
• Can they get overtime pay or bonus payment?

If the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following questions, it will usually mean that the worker is self-employed:

• Can they hire someone to do the work or engage helpers at their own expense?
• Do they risk their own money?
• Do they provide the main items of equipment they need to do their job, not just the small tools that many employees provide for themselves?
• Do they agree to do a job for a fixed price regardless of how long the job may take?
• Can they decide what work to do, how and when to do the work and where to provide the services?
• Do they regularly work for a number of different people?
• Do they have to correct unsatisfactory work in their own time and at their own expense?

Source: HM Revenue & Customs: Employment status

This issue was previously discussed here:

Ryanair Brookfield False Self Employment? [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums

Main point being if you are a Ryanair pilot living / working in the UK as a contractor, enjoying the benefits of tax efficient dividends through your ltd co, then you could potentially get a knock on the door from HMRC who could demand a significant amount of cash going all the way back to day 1. It seems there is little doubt that this scenario fails the test of genuine self employment and therefore lies inside IR35.

No, False employment is ALWAYS the fault of the EmployER, therefore, it is Ryanair who is resonsible for paying the owed taxes and social contributions.
A clear as water according to EU legislation.
The Employee is ALWAYS the victim and will more than probably even get a large compensation due to being forced to accept an illegal contract and work under illegal work conditions. And yes, if a company obliges you to sign a certain type of illegal copy, or not hire you at all, this is considered as a forced contract.:ok: So no exuses claiming that the employee could also not have accepted the contract...

Despegue,

The employer in the case is your Ltd Co, Ryanair are the client who you provide services to. The contract does not mean a lot, if your contract is IR35 compliant but your working practices show that you are clearly inside IR35 there will be penalties for you, not Ryanair.

I am sorry to say that there are no legal or tax reasons for Ryanair to concern themselves with IR35, the risk lies solely with you.

If HMRC decide to investigate your Ltd Co the costs in supporting this investigation can be substantial. It may be worth joining the Professional Contractors Group as they will provide support given a tax investigation as part of your membership.

I do not understand why an individual, or IALPA, does not go to HMRC with a contract and ask for a ruling. This can be done without any knowledge to RYR or BRK. What is then done with the answer gained is a later decision. All the talk on here is about unions and opinions etc. etc. Why not just ask the horse's mouth for the answer? Bar room lawyers are not necessary. HMRC advice should be free and confidential. I do not understand the reluctance to seek the official truth.

I think I can understand why an individual would hesitate; the worry that HMRC might decide that the pilot is liable for a large wedge of unpaid tax? Also, I imagine it is a bit of a symbiotic relationship existing between most contractors and the company - if they say nothing and don't rock the boat they can exit ASAP and never look back, once they get the required number of hours to move to a reputable employer. Mutually beneficial.

On the other hand, why trade unions collectively representing the profession don't bring this to the Revenue...

What makes you think they haven't?

Depone,

Exactly my point!

How the system works IMHO
 

Politicians occasionaly get elected because of the amount of backing they receive (financial or otherwise).
Some might feel they owe a debt to those that help them get elected.
How they repay this I leave to your imagination.
Aviation contractors are small fry compared to the big boys - you might ask about the recent British news items with tax holidays or Microsoft and others in the Irish republic with CGT. ( as Merkel has been complaining for several years).
IMHO asking the authorities about the anomalies of aviation contractors when there are MANY using the same loopholes to avoid tens of millions is a waste of time...:ugh:

You forget that contractors working at FR pay full tax, in fact more than they would pay as employees in the UK.

Definately.
And I wish people would stop having, or giving the impression that all FR "employees" are "enjoying the benefits", as Baracus put it. What happens with old old contracts I do not know, but the new old contracts and the new new contracts are pretty well screwed down.
The vast majority are operating under the LTD scam (which, for the benefits of the more litigious pikey, means Socially Commendable Asset Management) and lots and lots of revenue goes to the Revenue.

Surely an individual could de-identify the contract, both from themselves, the agency and the client. They then ask HRMC IR dept what would be their employment & tax status if offered such a contract. They could even already be on the contract, or anticipating it. It is an information seeking question in general terms. No-one is implicated and thus no-one is liable for any penalty action. The old BRK contract, as claimed here, is still in use with some, and the new one, we are told, is being enforced as the old one dies, or new-comers arrive. Surely bar-room lawyer opinion is not necessary. One individual with a version of each of any current contract would suffice to achieve an answer once and for-all. It might help stop the demise of the profession, because this type of 'employment' will be copied just as baggage, boarding & credit card charges were done in spades. Arguing round & round in circles is a waste of breath.

Hey Everybody, thanks a lot for your advices,

it seems like being in contact with RPG and IALPA together with the Bates Wells & Braithwaite lawyers office gave me a good solution.

The lawyer sent out one letter for a very reasonable price informing BRK that we are not answering to any threats or blackmails.

The result of the recent lawsuit proved that the 5000euros is illegal and thus it seems like my case is solved

RE: Steve Cockney
 

Dear Steve,

I take the liberty of answering your comment:

I want to inform you that I was part of the IALPA and RPG, and they helped me out, however I was trying to consult every possible source in order to find colleagues with similar situations. Further on, Brookfield has sent out court documents to ex-pilots and I advice everybody to be proactive and not wait until a subpoena arrives in your letterbox.

Please limit your comments to those with relevant information, because it kind of clutters my thread.