To ask if they can really fire my mum for this?

[GilligansKitchenIsland]

My mum has worked for the last 30+ years for a religious (Christian) non-profit organisation. She's not paid by the organisation for her work; she raises her own funds by talking about her work at churches, and people who are on board with it can pledge to give her a monthly donation. The donations are made out to the organisation but specified for her. The organisation takes a 10% cut to cover their admin costs, and then deposits the remainder into her bank account. On paper, and for tax purposes, she's considered self-employed (on the advice of HMRC). But for all other intents and purpises she's a de facto (?) employee of this organisation - she works in their office, has a boss within the organisation who assigns her duties and signs off her annual leave, is bound by their policies, etc.

Recently, the organisation employed a new director who has been making some changes, one of which is to "clean up" some of the staffing. My mum has been variously told that her role is being restructured and there will no longer be a position for her, that they're upgrading to new software and they don't anticipate that she'll be able to adapt, and after that, that she "looks too miserable" and will probably have to go. She hasn't been given a timeframe for when she will be asked to leave, but they've made it clear she will be.

Because she's not officially employed by them, she's (presumably) not protected by employment law. She's also not part of any trade union. There is an HR department in the organisation - but they're the ones asking her to leave, so she can't appeal to them for help.

I realise her situation vis her employee status is very unusual but does anyone have any insight into her rights here? Can they really ask her to leave after so many years service with no good reason? She's dedicated her career to this organisation at significant personal cost, and is pretty devastated that they would screw her over right at the end of her career.

(Sorry for the long post and for (mis)using the AIBU topic for traffic!)

So what does she do other than go around asking people for money? How can multiple people make a living wage from other peoples donations at all?

So if people do not donate she doesn't get paid?

Oh I see Gilligan I understand what you are saying now.

I can imagine that any charity would need to phase out people "employed" or working on that basis, its not going to be tenable in the long term, there are definitely HMRC issues. Yes as previous posters have said she needs to get legal advice not only about her future but with regard to the way she's been "paid" for 30+ years.

Did she pay her national insurance stamp during that time?

It sounds like a bit of a dodgy arrangement all round. If she's not technically employed by this organisation she can't be fired by them. But if she thinks they are acting as employers she then she might have a case. Especially if they are more or less her employers and are paying below minimum wage.

There are three things here;
IR35 law (google it) regarding what is considered as self employed versus employed. They will have to pay up for underpaid wages (national living wage), holidays national insurance etc if it is found that they were avoiding their responsibilities and she was employed. Which leads to...
Age discrimination, she is 69 and has been performing for her 30 years with no warnings or performance issues raised (assumed).
Binning the person over state pension age without redundancy payment, because they can. It seems many rights are lost when you hit SPA.
She may decide it is not worth it but they have to know this is not right so may decide on a goodwill, without prejudice settlement. IR35 is a biggie and they are not going to want that to come out.

has she been paying her taxes, NI etc etc for 30 years?

@tawnyport - There are about 350 workers in my mum's situation. They each have specific roles to do, contributing to the aims of the organisation. They also spend a small portion of their time raising their living expenses. She lives on a very low income, because yes, it all comes from people's donations who share the aims of the organisation and believe that her role within that is worth supporting. Also within the organisation are about 15 people in salaries positions who are paid from the 10% taken out of the 350 workers' donations (which also goes towards renting the office building, admin costs etc). I realise it's quite an unusual way to operate.
@sweeneytoddsrazor - exactly. If a donor drops out, her income drops. She lives very frugally.

Yes, she has been paying her taxes, NI etc for 30+ years. She has sought advice from HMRC to ensure she is paying correctly, and they have also independently audited the organisation.
@Jamiefraserskilt - I will look into IR35 law, that's really helpful, thanks!

The situation sounds bizarre and certainly not a regular employee set up, so I'd be surprised if she could claim usual employee rights.

This is a very odd situation and I am amazed that HMRC have not put a stop to it.
Absolutely see ACAS - or do you know an employment lawyer who can offer you free advice? My first thought was age discrimination too, and pretty blatantly. I would be surprised if even the self employed were not protected against that.
It's also not, as I understand it, legal to employ someone on less than minimum wage even if they're self employed.
They sound like an awful organisation and for what it's worth, I would say your aim should probably be to get a decent settlement from them rather than an ongoing position.

1. Take notes, of everything that happens, everything they say to her, with dates, names, details, etc.

What I don't understand is why your mother has devoted 30 years of her life to lining the pockets of this bunch of cunts. The whole organisation sounds like a complete scam that benefits nobody except the actual organisers. Your mum would have been better off working for any supermarket or fast food chain, by the sound of it.

So look, I'm NOT A LAWYER and have no legal training, but have a look at this page:

m.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=5890

The wording that's interesting to me here is "in business for themselves". Your mother isn't in business for herself.

She might qualify as a Commercial Agent under the EU regulations, in which case she is entitled to be compensated.

www.mylawyer.co.uk/employees-workers-and-the-self-employed-a-A76056D76200/

I'm going to stop posting links now, but these guys sound like they might give you a free consultation:

www.pauldoranlaw.com/self-employed-workers-and-employment-rights/

well, how very Christian of her employers

@nancy75 Yes, that irony struck me too.

I too was under the impression you had to have different sources of income to be considered self employed
Equally if the organisation are dictating holidays etc and treating her as an employee then there might be some differences.

Still unsure what it is that actually gets done if there are a number of fundraisers who take 90% of what they raise as income and the other 10% pays for private fundraisers to raise funds.

I love how non-Christians have very firm ideas on what it means to be a Christian. Even if she is deemed to be an employee, anyone can be made redundant regardless of how well they do their job or how their pay is.

What I don't understand is why your mother has devoted 30 years of her life to lining the pockets of this bunch of cunts. The whole organisation sounds like a complete scam that benefits nobody except the actual organisers. Your mum would have been better off working for any supermarket or fast food chain, by the sound of it

Agreed. I can't quite get my head around this set up TBH.

Still unsure what if is that actually gets done if there are a number of fundraisers who take 90% of what they raise as income and the other 10% pays for private fundraisers to raise funds. I was going to say the same thing except that op is now saying the 10% goes to pay for the handful of employees and the building etc.

Op is your mum raising funds from which 90p in the pound do nothing but support her with the remainder going to admin costs? From what you’ve said, it sounds more like a glorified private benefits scheme.

I should have added a scam. I’m not saying your mum realises what she’s participating in.

You say there are 350 people in your Mum's situation. Are they getting rid of others too? I wonder if the new director has realised that they have been exploiting them and acting illegally and are trying to make the problem go away without it blowing up.

There's a lot of companies who have told their workers that they're self employed to avoid adhering to employment rights and reduce tax and NI costs but most of those going through tribunals have found the opposite (Deliveroo etc). Disgusting way to treat people.

If your Mum has been doing this for 30 years and not earning very much how has she made ends meet? What's her housing situation? Does she have a husband or partner? I would also worry about her pension situation, has she made NI contributions to allow her to receive the state pension. From what you have said, I fear not. At her age she should be retired if that's what she wants and be receiving a full state pension plus possibly pension credit if she's on her own with little or no income.

This all sounds awful and I hope there's a resolution but if there are several people in your Mum's situation, the cost of putting all this right as in compensating for 30 years of exploitation especially if she has no pension is probably to great for the organisation to bear without going bust and then the money simply wouldn't be there. How has this all gone on for so long without people coming unstuck with pensions or NMW before?

Looking back I see you mention your dad, so if she lives with him, at least she won't be destitute?

You say she has also being paying taxes and NI for 30 years so that must mean she's getting her full state pension?

So it sounds like age discrimination might be a factor as they're not allowed to force people to retire if they don't want to. Plus possibly not paying the NMW if it's found she is an employee.

Still unsure what if is that actually gets done if there are a number of fundraisers who take 90% of what they raise as income and the other 10% pays for private fundraisers to raise funds. I was going to say the same thing except that op is now saying the 10% goes to pay for the handful of employees and the building etc

Still no clearer. 90% of funds raised goes to your DM and 10% to provide office space and administer the whole set up.

In the meantime donors are receiving tax rebates on their charitable donations