What to pay

[Hodge]

I have been reluctant to employ again because of past experiences, it was only yesterday I said I wouldn't employ again but after discussing it with my accountant it's going to be the safest way forward. I've just got to work it all out. Thanks for you input.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Kev Stephenson]

Guarantee him 3 days a week at £60 per day and give pro rata holidays to match this.

 

Any days he works for you over this pay at £66 per day effectively buying any surplus holidays which he would have accrued had he been contracted to more than the 3 days.

 

For him he know he is getting a minimum of £180 (less any tax) a week

He still gets some paid holiday (which you can dictate, e.g. a 2 week xmas shutdown)

You only need to give 3 days a week but have in place the ability to give more and you both know where you are with respect to holidays etc.

 

Have in place a defined time frame for letting him know when he is working, e.g. You will know by Friday how many days we are doing next week. This gives him the chance to earn elsewhere if needed. State in the contract that you have first refusal of his time (subject to the agreed notice period). You also need some sort of cancellation policy. If you have told him it's 5 days next week and come Tuesday you know you will finish the weeks work by Thursday, what do you do with regards to work on the Friday.

[King92]

Can you do a Zero hours contract, set price per day? Or minimum days = 3 with extra days.

 

If the work is guaranteed now and wasn't before then he would be quids in but its getting them to see it that way!

 

Remember though it works both ways, you may be paying him X but if he earns you Y then its worth your while?

 

Failing that I would set a salary of 12k before tax or £47.43 per day, assuming full time contract of 253 working days (based on 2014).

 

Run some figures, business plans and spreadsheets with a base figure.

 

As if someone is gonna work every working day 8hrs for 12k a year! No reward what. so. ever.

[Paul Jenks]

Rubbish!!!

 

Many chose to run their own business because it gives them the freedom to work as and when they wish, many employees are also happy to have the same flexibility and are more than happy to have a zero hours contract.

 

As usual Huck you appear to have leapt in with comments before wholly understanding what I've written. I know you have quite fervent and forthright views on certain subjects.

 

Maybe, as a moderator, you could pass on your views and experiences, as I endeavour to do, in a more moderate way.

 

If my comments, which are, after all, only my point of view, lead you or anyone else to a misunderstanding, which then meant you, or anyone else, allowed themselves to get a little hot under the collar, then I apologise.

 

One of the companies I help run, a social enterprise, uses some ZHC. I don't like them, though I understand the business and employee case for using them.

 

They, ZHC, may the current, or near current, topic for hate. I have never used them and will never. They don't suit my business model or my mindset.

 

Acas - Zero hours contracts

 

As ACAS says, zero hours contracts can be used to cover a temporary need.

 

Acas - Zero Hours Myth Busting

 

When there is an ongoing requirement for someone to work regular hours they should be considered for permanent employment, whether full or part time.

 

 

I agree that ZHC can offer a very good level of flexibility for both employer and employee. For some this works well. As a long-term business model I think it sucks, you clearly don't.

 

I'm going to cry into my beer now. (Not really, I secretly enjoy your zealotry)

[skyhuck]

As usual Huck you appear to have leapt in with comments before wholly understanding what I've written. I know you have quite fervent and forthright views on certain subjects.

 

Maybe, as a moderator, you could pass on your views and experiences, as I endeavour to do, in a more moderate way.

 

If my comments, which are, after all, only my point of view, lead you or anyone else to a misunderstanding, which then meant you, or anyone else, allowed themselves to get a little hot under the collar, then I apologise.

 

One of the companies I help run, a social enterprise, uses some ZHC. I don't like them, though I understand the business and employee case for using them.

 

They, ZHC, may the current, or near current, topic for hate. I have never used them and will never. They don't suit my business model or my mindset.

 

Acas - Zero hours contracts

 

As ACAS says, zero hours contracts can be used to cover a temporary need.

 

Acas - Zero Hours Myth Busting

 

When there is an ongoing requirement for someone to work regular hours they should be considered for permanent employment, whether full or part time.

 

 

I agree that ZHC can offer a very good level of flexibility for both employer and employee. For some this works well. As a long-term business model I think it sucks, you clearly don't.

 

I'm going to cry into my beer now. (Not really, I secretly enjoy your zealotry)

 

Chill out Paul

 

I took no offence at your comment, I simply disagree.

 

PS, I'm not a mod.

[skyhuck]

I've just read the link you posted Paul, if anything it makes me like ZHC more not less.

 

If someone goes from being a self-employed to employed on a ZHC, it gives them considerable increased security, that can't be a bad thing surely?

 

The way I see it is many people on a ZHC would not have a job if they were not an option.

[kentjames]

As if someone is gonna work every working day 8hrs for 12k a year! No reward what. so. ever.

 

For me at 20 odd years of age I was working on £8400 salary, it never did me any harm and I could afford to live and more.

 

Plus if the lad is on £70 per day and randomly working, therefore an average of 2 days per working week thats only 7070.00 he is on at the moment, so therefore he would be better off.

[kentjames]

it gives them considerable increased security

Exactly!

[agg221]

I can't offer useful comment on a day rate, but I will offer some comment on employment. I am employed, but the way the company is structured, to all intents and purposes I run an SME, which I took on 8yrs ago as a loss-making enterprise of 4 people and have grown to a highly profitable enterprise of 32 people.

 

Within all of this, the most difficult part has been finding people. Not just any people (that's easy) but skilled, motivated and responsible people who do the job the way you want it done. It sounds from your initial post as though you may have found someone who meets these criteria.

 

When I find such people, I want to keep them, and that means keeping them happy and recognising the value they bring. As such, I pay them what they earn me, minus reinvestment costs and overhead (my salary costs are part of the overhead but in the early days when I was still doing the job as well as managing the activity it was about half my salary that needed covering). I also regularly keep them informed as to how the business is doing and what is needed, and let them know that they are valued. I also find out what their long-term plans are - I don't hold them to it, but check once a year (we have a formal appraisal process). That way, I know where they want to head and, where possible, facilitate it. Yes, this makes them more employable elsewhere, but it also means they are getting the most out of the role, which means they are more likely to stay.

 

There is nothing worse than trying to find new, good quality employees while the work is mounting up!

 

You may have given an indication as to a route forward. You reckon this person is conscientious and can be left to work unsupervised? Are there opportunities to take on one-man activities which would fill in the days you can't do? Things like hedge cutting/grass cutting/firewood cutting and splitting, which may not make you a profit but would cover your costs. Are there maintenance tasks which you currently do but could hand over, freeing up your time for quoting, which would increase turnover over all? This is a model of direct (earning) and indirect (non-earning) hours, where if you effectively work out an hourly cost, you can work out how many direct hours per week you need the two of you to be doing to earn the income you need.

 

I would be looking for ways to keep this person, for as long as is reasonable given their long-term aspirations, as it sounds like you should be able to benefit from it if you can.

 

Alec

[Philmypower]

I can't see why someone would rather ZHC over being self employed. If someone was on ZHC wouldn't the employer then have to provide them with PPE.

I was once threatened with ZHC, when I asked what it was I was told by my employer that it meant I had to phone him every morning and ask if I was needed.

I then pointed out that it's not a problem, I have all my own kit & tickets, I'll just leave.