public liability insurance

[felixthelogchopper]

Your thinking labour only surely, I hire a guy to stand as rescue climber if needed and to chip and clear site (his chipper and trailer) the fact he and I work the job at the same time is irrelevant. Don't get me wrong I have EL but was advised that it's necessary only when using labour only not a bona-fied contractor... It's down to definition of employment

 

It is indeed down to definition of employment and in this case, unless you are equal partners in the job, he is under your direction as to where,when and how the job is done so he is your employee in the terms of Employer's Liability. You would need to farm the whole job out to him in this case for him to be a bona fide subbie.

[MWArb]

It is indeed down to definition of employment and in this case, unless you are equal partners in the job, he is under your direction as to where,when and how the job is done so he is your employee in the terms of Employer's Liability. You would need to farm the whole job out to him in this case for him to be a bona fide subbie.

 

As previous post at what point does the line get drawn.. can you contact out small parts of any job?

[MWArb]

I'm not trying to be difficult... Just clear on the point between labour only and contractor.. it's something that's always bothered me as in the building industry I could contract out the act of installing ductwork brackets as I installed ductwork yet they were two separate jobs conducted at the sake time.

[felixthelogchopper]

As previous post at what point does the line get drawn.. can you contact out small parts of any job?

 

You could sub out something like the stump grind where it is a clear separate job, ie they could come days later and do the same job. When you look at subbie climbers or groundies, they are such an integral part of the job that it is impossible to separate them from employee status.

[MWArb]

You could sub out something like the stump grind where it is a clear separate job, ie they could come days later and do the same job. When you look at subbie climbers or groundies, they are such an integral part of the job that it is impossible to separate them from employee status.

 

Ok so an example.. the climbing operation requires no pull lines, no rigging, I'm in a field with no targets... The climber can work alone (unsafe and not done but for the sake of this example) the "groundy" is on nothing more than a site clearance contract. is he integral?

[MWArb]

I'd like to apologize to the op for the derail, perhaps another thread is needed, I think it's all been covered before but I like to question definitions in order to better understand them.

Edited December 31, 2013 by MWArb

[felixthelogchopper]

Ok so an example.. the climbing operation requires no pull lines, no rigging, I'm in a field with no targets... The climber can work alone (unsafe and not done but for the sake of this example) the "groundy" is on nothing more than a site clearance contract. is he integral?

 

I would say he is still integral. You wouldn't have him do the job at a separate time to when the tree work itself is done and it is easy to argue that he is there as a part of a team effort. The point about the stump grinder is that he can turn up anytime after the tree is down and do the job without direction other than 'grind that stump' whereas the groundie and climber are difficult to separate from each other. To go into further detail I would need my Tort text books which haven't been unpacked yet.

[MWArb]

Oh I see.

Yes that makes sense.

 

Subbing out the clean up. Genius!

 

I do see this as genius.. I'm so small that I have no truck, no chipper and no yard.. I still complete domestic work with the aid of a friends firm.. not a bad way to start on a minimal budget imo.

[MWArb]

I would say he is still integral. You wouldn't have him do the job at a separate time to when the tree work itself is done and it is easy to argue that he is there as a part of a team effort. The point about the stump grinder is that he can turn up anytime after the tree is down and do the job without direction other than 'grind that stump' whereas the groundie and climber are difficult to separate from each other. To go into further detail I would need my Tort text books which haven't been unpacked yet.

 

I get ya, and I agree. I think though both operations could in theory be done separately, once you put both on site together (though not conclusive proof of integral) it'd be hard to argue otherwise.. and I guess the moment communication between groundy and climber is established its one job.. I'm curious now to see if building industry has now defined it better than before.. I (as a builder) could contract out something as small as adding nuts and bolts to duct I was installing and not need to insure them.. I'm sure this has been fixed.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I get ya, and I agree. I think though both operations could in theory be done separately, once you put both on site together (though not conclusive proof of integral) it'd be hard to argue otherwise.. and I guess the moment communication between groundy and climber is established its one job.. I'm curious now to see if building industry has now defined it better than before.. I (as a builder) could contract out something as small as adding nuts and bolts to duct I was installing and not need to insure them.. I'm sure this has been fixed.

 

This might help: HM Revenue & Customs: Employment Status Indicator