what do make where you are?

[Daniël Bos]

NOT a sub contractor, hes working for you.

 

He has his own business, pimping himself out for specialist lorry stuff (wide, heavy, blonde loads etc) I hire him, he turns up, gives me an invoice, goes home.

 

How is he not a sub-contractor?

[samthescam]

The guy you get in is not a sub contractor then is he, niether is the self employed groundsman without a chipper.

 

I don't really get what your getting at. But as I've said I'm a bit thick. I'd call anyone who comes into do a certain job a subcontractor, but I don't see what the distinction is. Sometimes when I have a biggish paving job on, I'll "sub contract" it out to a bricklayer, the fact that he uses my cement mixer or that I order the materials to me doesn't mean he's now my employee... Although I don't really see why anyone is splitting hairs over this.

[samthescam]

NOT a sub contractor, hes working for you.

 

Where does your distinction end... If I'm sub contracted to install fencing, but I'm given a specification saying how it's meant to be done, and they offer to let me use there equipment, if it's say a farm. Am I now employed?

[Rupe]

He has his own business, pimping himself out for specialist lorry stuff (wide, heavy, blonde loads etc) I hire him, he turns up, gives me an invoice, goes home.

 

How is he not a sub-contractor?

 

You have employed him for the day, you have not sub contracted anything.

The contractor is the one with the contract to the customer, whoever you get in to help is working within your contract, as employees, even self employed people with their own businesses.

 

The problem is that, in some cases, the original contractor thinks that the people he gets in are sub contractors and nothing to do with him in terms of resonsibility.

[felixthelogchopper]

Where does your distinction end... If I'm sub contracted to install fencing, but I'm given a specification saying how it's meant to be done, and they offer to let me use there equipment, if it's say a farm. Am I now employed?

 

If the fencing is for the farm then surely you would be the contractor up to the point of borrowing equipment?

[Daniël Bos]

You have employed him for the day, you have not sub contracted anything.

The contractor is the one with the contract to the customer, whoever you get in to help is working within your contract, as employees, even self employed people with their own businesses.

 

The problem is that, in some cases, the original contractor thinks that the people he gets in are sub contractors and nothing to do with him in terms of resonsibility.

 

So when does he become a sub?

 

If I tell him what to do and go to the pub myself (it happens:biggrin:)

[felixthelogchopper]

You have employed him for the day, you have not sub contracted anything.

The contractor is the one with the contract to the customer, whoever you get in to help is working within your contract, as employees, even self employed people with their own businesses.

 

The problem is that, in some cases, the original contractor thinks that the people he gets in are sub contractors and nothing to do with him in terms of resonsibility.

 

Rupe is right, certainly from an insurance liability point of view. I think some of the confusion here is caused by the fact that the terms 'self-employed' and 'subcontractor' are not interchangeable.

[Rupe]

So when does he become a sub?

 

If I tell him what to do and go to the pub myself (it happens:biggrin:)

 

Thats a really good point!!! While you are in the pub, whatever he does on site is YOUR responsiblity, thats the point I'm making, these people are employed by you, they are not sub contractors doing a seperate contract for you as part of a larger contract to the main client.

 

So, you are in charge, if you want to go to the pub then fine but you are still in charge.

[felixthelogchopper]

So when does he become a sub?

 

If I tell him what to do and go to the pub myself (it happens:biggrin:)

 

Legally, it's a bit vague (like much law ) but rests on things such as are they told how to do job and when to turn up, do they supply their own tools? etc

[WorcsWuss]

This is far more clear cut that it sounds, and it's down to language and confusing / overlapping terminology.

Generally in the construction industry there are contractually 2 sorts of sub contractors [so the same applies to any industry]:

Bona Fide Sub Contractors - These are companies, however large or small, whom are retained by an appointed contractor above them to carry out the task, or part thereof, which they are employed to do. Generally they provide their own equipment, materials, labour and insurances.

Labour only sub-contractors - These are self employed people who you employ on an ad-hoc basis, either piece work or day work and some maybe act as gang masters, invoicing for a few other self employed guys and then paying them.

So, a bona-fide will provide all their own kit, labour, insurance.

A labour only sub contractor, otherwise known as self employed dude or dudess, can be employed for their bare hands and nothing else.

The terminology is confusing but when people talk of Sub-Contractors they generally mean bona fide's, but when they say they are subbing to someone themself they usually mean just working for someone on a self employed basis, with or without their own kit and often on their employers' insurance etc.

As said, Bona fides have a proper contract, labour only sub contractors are effectively the same as directly employed staff..

Edited February 21, 2012 by WorcsWuss