AIBU to feel annoyed my 8-hour role is becoming 21 hours for only £2pw more?

[MunterJobHunter]

I’ve been doing 8 hours sessional/contractor work a week and getting paid very well for it for almost 18 months now. I’m physically struggling with the 8 hours due to disability /illness but it means not having to rely on the state benefits and all the woes that go with claiming. 8hours also allows me to attend hospital up to three times a week for my appointments which is not negotiable.

The place I’m working are changing the role in May time, making it permanent staff and 21 hours a week but the pay will only be £2more a week than my current 8 hour role. I’ll have to interview for the job alongside others and while it will be highly sought after and loads of people would be happy with the ‘new’ wage and hours, I can’t help but feel hard done by. For me to apply means accepting essentially a pay cut of around £30 a hour to close to minimum wage. The job as it is now has been as a contractor for 25 years with a couple of people doing it in that time before me.

The new job will be almost 3 times the amount work for exactly the same pay doing exactly the same thing. Putting aside my physical struggles with the new amount of work which essentially will rule me out of the new job, Aibu to be a bit pissed off that they’re doing this?

I really thought I’d found a nice job that would see me to complete disability or retirement (whatever came first) and it took me ages to land this one. I’m gutted. No one wants disabled 50something year old women

Doesn’t sound like your comparing apples and pears because if the role is employed they’ll be paying your tax and NI, holiday pay, pension etc.

Even after that you’ll be worse off financially but till have more security. It’s just the way the cookie crumbles (I work 3 days per week and 2 days contract btw, and it’s the employed role that helped me buy my home and sleep without anxiety about an unstable income at night).

That’s the risk of being a contractor. The instability of the job is reason you're paid more. Start looking for other work.

But this is just how it is for contractors as you must have known. You get paid a much better headline rate than if you were employed but have bugger all fringe benefits or security, and it is often the case that contractor roles don't last all that long - christ knows why they've had this one for 25 years.

It sounds like you’ve had a good run. Is that the going rate for the job or could you get a similar job/contract elsewhere for the same money?

Don't apply. Play hardball. They may appoint someone who is less capable than you and regret it after 6 months and come back to you.

It is reasonable to pay permanent staff a little less than contractor staff as there are extra costs of employment and the employee has a lot more security in an actual job rather than as a contractor.

But your minimum threshold for the 21hr role should be 21x no less than 75% of your 8hr hourly rate and you should absolutely let them know that you wouldn't consider doing 21hrs for any less than that

It’s unlikely I could find a similar rate of pay these days because people are willing to do the same job for much less such is the state
of the jobs market. I certainly couldn’t find the same amount of hours.,

Contractor and substantive is completely different.

Think AL, sickness, security, pension etc etc

I think you’re right. Employers costs taken into consideration still don’t account for the wage drop but they know plenty of young people will jump at the chance of this job and accept the lower wage.

That’s very true but taking almost 75% of the current wage is far more than employers costs will be.

Are you part of the union?
For awhile, contractors have had the same rights as full-time employees after a certain period of time

Not sure that’s correct. Staff on temporary contracts can gain rights after a certain period. But contractors are self employed and enjoy a higher rate of pay to offset the precarious nature of not having a permanent job. I don’t think contractors gain any rights.

It’s ok to be annoyed but there is nothing unfair about this situation. You get paid well as a contractor primarily because they have no ongoing commitment to employ you, in any capacity. Most career contractors expect to move roles regularly, often within the same year.

Sounds like that isn’t for you. As young people could come do it, it sounds like a role where you don’t need lots of experience. Could you look to retrain in a role where there is an ongoing high demand for contractors, so you have more leverage.

Agree, this poster is mixing up fixed term contract )ie temporary employee) with a contractor (ie own company, usually highly paid).

I totally get why you’re annoyed and upset but as others have said there are sound economic reasons why contractors are paid more. It’s quite unusual to have a role done by a contractor for 25 years.

Is it still only £2pw more when you take into account sick pay, holiday pay, pension etc?

Absolutely this. I think you'll regret it otherwise but it'll be too late as the horse will have bolted.

YANBU to be annoyed but I can see why they would prefer to employ someone who can do 3 days a week & be more flexible than someone who does one day or two half days.

YANBU to be gutted but it's not unreasonable of the company to want to bring it in-house rather than pay contractors' rates.

Then just go for the job.

You are not unreasonable, but neither is the employer.
They have realised they are paying significantly over the odds for the role and they need to cut cut costs to a competitive rate.
Such is life being send employed.

When you're a contractor you should have a minimum 6 months or even better 1 years worth of living costs to tide you over to the next contract. You are nut entitled to the same benefits as employed people. That's why contractors are paid significantly more.

And this is why they don’t want to pay you over the odds to do it as a contractor - there are plenty of people willing to take it as an employed role that will give them financial stability, mortgage ability, sick pay, time off to care for dependents etc.

I think the ‘hard ball’ advice isn’t helpful, personally, they know they don’t need you

And “I really thought I’d found a nice job” that’s the point, it’s not a job.

You sell your services by the hour for as long as they’re prepared to pay for them. They aren’t prepared to pay for them anymore.

And this is the million dollar question is she inside or outside of IR 35 and who did the assessment?

Maybe I wasn’t clear in my OP that I can’t work more hours due to disability and having to attend hospital three times a week. I can’t go for the job.

Public sector?
So many contractors in some areas being vastly overpaid for no real reason

I get that it's shit for you but when organisations need to tighten their belts these cuts are essential

The employer is going to get 21 hours work for less money than the 8 hours they got previously. That sounds like a no brainer to me

And the whole point of using contractors is that we could drop them at a moments notice. I could work for many multiples of my hourly rate if I became a contractor but I don't fancy the risks

Could you negotiate a role where they save money and you continue working your current hours and get the benefits of employment? Explain why the job works for you, what your employment terms would need to be (including the benefits of employment), and offer to save them money while keeping a reliable experienced worker.