Taking on an employee

[swinny]

Spoilt a good thread here with this bullshit. 

 

Carry on egg's that's what everyone else does. 👍 

[Dan Maynard]

Other problem with employees is when things go quiet you can end up backed into a corner. I'm going through this problem in my engineering business, two good guys that have been with us for years but reality is we've not got enough work to pay the wages, and not enough money in the bank to pay redundancy either. Rock and a hard place.

[oldwoodcutter]

Running a successful day to day tree business keeping the work coming in is hard enough, without pussy footing around wet nursing brash draggers with guaranteed hours and school run dispensations.

Of course try and keep good experienced workers but on your terms, firm but fair.

Climbers we know are a separate breed, but here the poster was talking about a groundie.

[jfc]

Op said the guy wanted more money and paye. Employing someone will cost you a lot more NI, PPE, hols, ?pension, admin. We're talking thousands extra a year. Maybe 30% more than self employed. If they want a higher hourly rate too you are going to be paying way more than you do now.

Think carefully about it, especially as work seems less secure for many companies at present.

[dangb93]

I went for several years using only subbies. It was great from the perspective that I knew what they were going to cost me, and I didn’t have to pay anything else out on them (no training, no ppe, no sick pay, no holiday etc) but it was extremely stressful when they messed me about, didn’t turn up, cancelled days they’d agreed to do, or sulked when they couldn’t run away to the pub at 2.30pm…

 

But I wanted to stay the right side of the law so eventually I offered one promising subbie who worked with me most, a full time job.

This brought me security in that unless he was unwell or holiday he would always turn up and work a set amount of hours a day. And he would wear the company branded clothing, and I could train him in areas where he needed to the benefit of my business.

 

I was previously an employee and got treated like trash despite working so hard, and I thought I would look after this employee. We worked 7.30 till 4.30 Monday to Thursday. On Fridays we worked 7.30 till 11.30 and then went and found something to eat which I would pay for, then we spent 12.30 till 3.30 back at the yard, “tidy friday” checking kit over, cleaning, sharpening etc. Saturday was only ever worked in an emergency or if we were really busy. If he worked longer than 4.30 overtime was duly paid. I put him through several courses. I paid him a decent wage.  He had been with me about three years, and when I had my accident last November and made him redundant I had ended up with someone who had refused to come in more than three days a week, who was lazy, spent ages on there phone, moaned at working in the rain, moaned at the task each day, yet all the time telling me he needed paying more. He started off really well, but went downhill from there. He took advantage of all my decent behaviour towards him and thought he should have an easy ride. I spoilt him basically. 

What I’m trying to say is that there was no easy option for me. Subbies were unreliable and stressful. The employee route is like finding a needle in a haystack. It’s worse than the subbie route if you don’t get it right….

[swinny]

40 minutes ago, dangb93 said:

I went for several years using only subbies. It was great from the perspective that I knew what they were going to cost me, and I didn’t have to pay anything else out on them (no training, no ppe, no sick pay, no holiday etc) but it was extremely stressful when they messed me about, didn’t turn up, cancelled days they’d agreed to do, or sulked when they couldn’t run away to the pub at 2.30pm…

 

But I wanted to stay the right side of the law so eventually I offered one promising subbie who worked with me most, a full time job.

This brought me security in that unless he was unwell or holiday he would always turn up and work a set amount of hours a day. And he would wear the company branded clothing, and I could train him in areas where he needed to the benefit of my business.

 

I was previously an employee and got treated like trash despite working so hard, and I thought I would look after this employee. We worked 7.30 till 4.30 Monday to Thursday. On Fridays we worked 7.30 till 11.30 and then went and found something to eat which I would pay for, then we spent 12.30 till 3.30 back at the yard, “tidy friday” checking kit over, cleaning, sharpening etc. Saturday was only ever worked in an emergency or if we were really busy. If he worked longer than 4.30 overtime was duly paid. I put him through several courses. I paid him a decent wage.  He had been with me about three years, and when I had my accident last November and made him redundant I had ended up with someone who had refused to come in more than three days a week, who was lazy, spent ages on there phone, moaned at working in the rain, moaned at the task each day, yet all the time telling me he needed paying more. He started off really well, but went downhill from there. He took advantage of all my decent behaviour towards him and thought he should have an easy ride. I spoilt him basically. 

What I’m trying to say is that there was no easy option for me. Subbies were unreliable and stressful. The employee route is like finding a needle in a haystack. It’s worse than the subbie route if you don’t get it right….

Absolutely spot on there and similar to my own experiences  though you did well to keep them for 3 years.... 

[Sviatoslav Tulin]

All I can say F… all employers ,and all EMPLOYEES  AS WELL,only partnership and short contracts or even better job done money payed ,job not finished money not payed, i operate only that way.

[Clutchy]

If you want to a build a proper business, have less stress, increase quality and dependability then you should be employing. 

 

I actually think its grossly unfair how many tree companies get away with blatantly having employees but on a subbie basis. The field needs to be levelled. Will just have to wait until this becomes flavour of the week for HMRC who will nail a load of companies, and then do nothing again for 10 years 😂  

Having employees gives you positive pressure to make x a day / month. 

My staff are great and cost less than subbies. Mostly because I've invested in the from the beginning, putting them through all their courses and of course, tying them into a payback over 2 year requirement which keeps them keen rather than leaving. 

Don't be scared to fire, and don't be slow to do so. People can fake it for the first 3-6 months, bin them if standards slip. Works both ways, make sure you're a great employer, pay bonuses when things are going well or jobs that you thought would be 2 days get done in 1 and so on. 1-1's as cringey as they can be, should be done at least twice a year. Much easier to iron out small problem before they become big! Ask them what they think you could be doing better, and what would make their day to day more enjoyable within reason. 

Give them a career!. All 6 of our staff were not in arb before joining and I honestly think that's the best way, otherwise you get all the baggage from the poor traits they have learnt from bad employers. 

They can be moulded into your own high standards. That and don't let a bad apple spoil the bunch or you'll loose your best guys. 

Just my opinion of course 

[Mick Dempsey]

15 minutes ago, Clutchy said:

If you want to a build a proper business, have less stress, increase quality and dependability then you should be employing. 

 

I actually think its grossly unfair how many tree companies get away with blatantly having employees but on a subbie basis. The field needs to be levelled. Will just have to wait until this becomes flavour of the week for HMRC who will nail a load of companies, and then do nothing again for 10 years 😂  

Having employees gives you positive pressure to make x a day / month. 

My staff are great and cost less than subbies. Mostly because I've invested in the from the beginning, putting them through all their courses and of course, tying them into a payback over 2 year requirement which keeps them keen rather than leaving. 

Don't be scared to fire, and don't be slow to do so. People can fake it for the first 3-6 months, bin them if standards slip. Works both ways, make sure you're a great employer, pay bonuses when things are going well or jobs that you thought would be 2 days get done in 1 and so on. 1-1's as cringey as they can be, should be done at least twice a year. Much easier to iron out small problem before they become big! Ask them what they think you could be doing better, and what would make their day to day more enjoyable within reason. 

Give them a career!. All 6 of our staff were not in arb before joining and I honestly think that's the best way, otherwise you get all the baggage from the poor traits they have learnt from bad employers. 

They can be moulded into your own high standards. That and don't let a bad apple spoil the bunch or you'll loose your best guys. 

Just my opinion of course 

How’s the payback over 2 year thing work? 

[Clutchy]

5 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

How’s the payback over 2 year thing work? 

 

Would look like this -

 

Training Agreement: Undertaking to repay costs incurred during external training courses

 

This Agreement is dated 01/10/2022 and is made between:

 

NAME, the employee

 

And

 

Clutchy tree care lol, the employer

 

Whereas:

 

1. The Employee is employed by the Employer as a Arborist

The Employee has obtained a place in relation to a course of study leading to the award of:

Chainsaw maintenance, cross cut and small fell CS30,31 (20-12)

Climbing and Aerial rescue CS38 (20-13) 

Chainsaw from rope and harness CS39 (21-08)

 

 

It is hereby agreed and declared that:

 

1. In consideration of the Employer agreeing to meet the costs of the Courses which are set out in the Schedule to this Agreement (“£2,046”), the Employee undertakes to reimburse to the Employer the costs if:

 

1. 1. He or she voluntarily withdraws from or terminates the Course early without the Employer’s prior written consent;

 

1. 2. He or she is dismissed or otherwise compulsorily discharged from the Course, unless the dismissal or discharge arises out of the discontinuance generally of the Course;

 

1. 3. His or her employment is terminated by the Employer for any reason prior to completion of the Course; or

 

1. 4. He or she resigns from the employment of the Employer either prior to completion of the Course or within (24 months) after the end of the Course, except that, in the latter case, the amount which would otherwise be due to the Employer shall be reduced by [¹/₂₄^th] part for each complete calendar month after the end of the Course during which the Employee remains employed by the Employer.

 

1. 5. To the extent permitted by law, the Employee agrees that the Employer may deduct a sum equal to the whole or part of the Costs due under the terms of this Agreement from his wages (as defined in section 27 of the Employment Rights Act 1996) or from any other allowances, expenses or other payments due to the Employee.

 

1. 6. The amount due to the Employer under the terms of this Agreement is a genuine attempt by the Employer to assess its loss as a result of the termination of the Employee’s employment and takes into account the derived benefit to the Employer. This Agreement is not intended to act as a penalty on the Employee upon termination of his employment.

 

 

 

SIGNED:

 

………………………………………….

[employee]

 

SIGNED:

 

…………………………………………..

 

[Clutchy Director]