Employed for tax purposes - sick pay?

[Concestor]

I am basically self employed and was due years but recently my employer made me be employed for tax purposes IE I'm on payroll but I don't have any employment rights or privileges. I only get paid for hours worked, if I go on holiday I don't get paid.

I'm currently really unwell mentally and desperately need to be signed off, but I don't know if I could still be paid? I put in a monthly hours claim currently to get paid, so if I wasn't working how would I do that?

I don't want to ask my employer because I don't want then to know I'm unwell if I won't be able to take some time off paid, as they might make me take time off anyway but I need to be earning.

Your OP says employed, the screenshot says self -employed...

4th and 5th words in OP - self employed.

It is perfectly possible to be on payroll for tax purposes but still self employed. Whether the OPs employer is pulling a fast one, we don't know, but OP seems to understand their employment status, so until it becomes obvious they are wrong, we could assume they aren't?

Read the end of the sentence...

She says she's employed for tax purposes and the screenshot says she should be self employed for tax purposes. Yes she says she's 'basically self employed' but that's not the same thing.

You are being pedantic unnecessarily. I do a tax return. I also am on the payroll and am paid via that. It takes off tax. I am not an employee. Ergo I'm self employed but am "employed for tax purposes" which is the phrase used by my "employer".

If you can help answer my question then please do but if you can't can you stop derailing please? I've posted in legal not AIBU.

If you are only an employee for tax purposes you are very unlikely to get any sick pay, you may not even be entitled to SSP if you are still declaring the income as self employed with tax deducted at source

The only people that can really answer this though are your HR department

Thanks, I just didn't want to alert them to the fact I'm struggling mentally if I wouldn't be able to take time off anyway, but I may have to.

Casual worker yes is entitled to holiday pay (12.07%) on top of their hourly rate however they are not entitled to sick pay.

Is national insurance deducted through payroll? SSP is part of the NI legislation not tax so that will determine whether it will be considered.

No, SSP is covered by the Social Security and Housing Benefits Act. It is not related to National Insurance. Self-employed individuals pay NI but are not eligible for SSP.

I was trying to simplify things.
If a payment isn't subject to Class 1 national insurance then it isn't considered for SSP criteria. There are certain types of PAYE schemes, pension schemes for example, which are tax only. Those payments aren't considered for SSP as they're no NI schemes. Same as some TRONC schemes.
SSP is not covered by ICTA, so it matters if OP has had NI deducted or not.
NI- yes, maybe eligible for SSP
NI - no, definitely not.

Surely it's not right that the company deducts tax and you also do a tax return?

The %age holiday pay was stopped years ago, its not that simple nowadays

Not saying some employers dont use it but it's not the legal way to do it for casual workers

Yes, I've had similar recently. Where I am it was called being a 'deemed employee'. Basically you get zero employment rights but they deduct tax and NI for you.

I can almost guarantee you won't get sick leave. I know someone who was doing the same and didn't get SMP maternity leave in same circumstances.

I think you're getting derailed by people who want to insist their interpretation of your employment status is correct and yours isn't. They might be right, but that's not what you asked - and there no reason to believe you're wrong right now.

Based on what you have said, as I have already told you, SSP does not accrue, but ESA may be claimable- unlike SSP you claim ESA, and it has nothing to do with the employer.

That said, "alerting" the "employer" is irrelevant in many ways - if you choose not to work for them ( for any reason) then you are not obliged to, but equally they aren't obliged to offer you any work in the future.

Thanks. The difficulty here is that this is definitely a job and it ought to be employed. I work a set amount of days for them on projects and an an integral part of the team. I can't just not work, not really. The whole set up is wrong but I have to work within what it is.

I'll look into ESA.

I do one because I don't just work for them, or at least I didn't until recently. Currently I do but I still need to do a tax return because of my other work.

If you’ve worked for others and are still able to, that’s self employed.

Could you take one day sick OP and see if you are paid for that?

When I worked in retail lots of the staff had two jobs and they were employed at both of rhem., isn't that quite common if you can't get full time hours, it doesn't make you self employed

You need to get proper advice.

A casual employee can get paid a higher rate per hour to account for the lack of sick pay and holidays.
Others are subcontractors who pay their own tax, sick pay insurance etc. Are you one of those?

So you can be an employee for tax purposes but that doesn't make you an employee for legal purposes (then entitled to sick pay, pension, holiday etc). I imagine you're being treated as self employed for legal purposes and your client has decided to make any contractor an employee for tax purposes to cover themselves on IR35/off-payroll working. Things like sick pay is usually covered in your contract. I would go on the basis that you wouldn't get it. But you could have a chat with HR to confirm. Maybe ask them if they have a policy on it as you're unsure. I hope you manage to get some time if you're struggling

It sounds like you're an IR35 worker? In which case you wouldn't be entitled to sick pay I'm afraid OP.

You are causing some of the confusion here with your posts. You either are, or are not, an employee. You are being treated as not, but you cannot argue it both ways. If you wish to claim that you are employed then that is an entirely different matter and an employment tribunal claim. Even self-employed people have things that are "definitely jobs" - there is no such thing as "ought to be employed". These are matters of law and only a court can decide.

What I'm saying is that this ought to be an employed post, I'm treated as though I'm employed, it really isn't a contract role, and this is why it's so difficult. In my opinion the firm are breaking the law on these roles. But, I don't think that makes any difference to the question I asked, as I was very clear that this is an employed for tax purposes role and my question was around sick pay. I can't help it if posters are getting themselves sidetracked from that. I'm literally only asking about the sick pay element of an employed for tax purposes role.

@zurala I think you are classed as a “worker”. ACAS give detailed info on what a worker is so look at their web site. I’ve attached what I think is relevant. As you can see, sick pay depends on your NI contributions. Not your income tax position. So are you paying NI or not? ACAS also have a help line.