Tekforums
Chat => Photography => Topic started by: zpyder on February 23, 2013, 12:44:25 PM
-
I've been asked to do a photo for a project the Uni is running. They needed something "recycling" orientated for an animation they're doing, and the animator had suggested a photo on Getti that would have been £428 at the resolution they needed.
The people doing the project are quite keen to use a sign in front of a recycling plant, so I've said £200. Figure that I could have said £300+ and gotten away with it (The budget is there and it needs spending) but this way they may be more likely to ask for other stuff from me if it means they can get 2x as many photos. It should be an easy job so long as the recycling plant is happy with the sign being photographed, all trade marks and logos can be photoshopped out.
Just curious what you guys would have done in this boat. In theory work could ask me to do it during the week with their equipment and not actually pay me anything other than my salary. For me to charge I'm going to have to do it out of hours!
-
Probably something similar tbh, you don't want to charge anywhere near the £428 as they'd just go to Getty probably so £200 for what should be a couple of hours work for you tops is good going and like you say you might get more work out of it in the future which you can easily charge £200 for and depending on what they want photographed maybe more.
I've actually been asked to photograph a clay pigeon shoot one of the solicitors at work is taking a few clients out too but there was no mention of being paid for it as it was during work time but using my own gear, should have asked for something I guess but too late now already said I'd do it. Might casually mention it to the head of marketing, I've been printing all my flickr photos out on the photocopiers at work and she's seen some of the ones I've printed so asked to have a look at my flickr site, which got forwarded around the entire marketing team in case there was anything they can use, don't think there was but I'll keep showing her new stuff just in case.
-
I'd maybe mention the fact you are using £xxxx of equipment for the clay pigeon shoot and that it'd be good for a little bit of money to at least cover the cost of insuring the equipment. Only reason I'm happy taking my kit to work and using it is that it's all insured. Costs a bit and I'm not renewing it this year, but it really is a good bit of piece of mind. I might take out some short term insurance this summer if I go travelling.
-
I think thats fair what you're charging, but it is always hard to judge for yourself without feeling its either not worth your time or not going to be competitive enough. I'm sure I undercharge on a lot of things but it keeps the work coming in as clients are very happy to keep coming back if you're honest, hardworking and they feel you're not ripping them off. If something takes me 30 mins I won't charge people a full hour like the greedy people I used to work for would. It means I don't see as much money but having them come back to you without them even looking elsewhere first is always good.
-
Yeah, I'm going on the basis that for my first commission, which was an eye photo about 2 years ago, I was lucky that I had said £20, and the graphics designer told me £200 or more would be the normal fee for something like that, so he'd pay me £200!
-
Bit of a rant. Sorry.
Oh joy. It was inevitable I guess. I'd heard rumour about some of the stuff that happens internally at the uni but always thought it was just cynical bitter people talking about it and took it with a pinch of salt, but now it really does seem that, no, there are politics and things at foot, and I might be on the receiving end for once.
I invoiced the uni for the shoot, after going out on Saturday and getting the footage. Got an email today to see the head of the school admin. To start with she said they couldn't pay me, due to being a staff member already on the PAYE system. Then when it was obvious that I wasn't just going to turn around and say "oh well, it was worth a try, keep the photos", she changed her tact and said that she'd speak to the dean and see if they could pay me via overtime, but almost definitely not the full £200.
Any thoughts? There were all kinds of veiled threats and accusations, nothing clear and transparent, but apparently I know the ordering and purchasing system and so should have known I needed to give them a purchase order number, I should have invoiced them first, could have done it during office hours as part of my technical role as it's very broad and can include pretty much anything, and should be VAT registered (see other thread).
In my defence I'm sure that orders are made without PO numbers (I pointed out we pay companies by credit card, fair enough I can't be paid by credit card, but what about cheque etc?), the graphics designer from france that needed an eye photo essentially told me what he wanted how much they'd pay, and that was that, I even told the guy who commissioned me he had two choices, I do it in my own time and invoice accordingly, or he could arrange for me to do it during office hours if he agreed it with my line manager. I operated fairly I feel. I was sorely tempted at one point to just say "Fine, I'll have all the photos back that the project has been using then" or even suggest I'll speak to the union about it, as I am sure there are ways I could be paid fairly, and that the admin is just trying to avoid doing that...?
-
I'd ask for the photos back unless paid in full, also take in to account even if paid as overtime you'll be taxed on top of that!
-
your going to pay tax & NI on that £200 - so you will end up with around £150 - can you swindle it to a bit of a pay rise? Im assuming theres pay flexibility within your grade.
Even if you can swing £1k a year & offer to do 2-3 shoots a year?
-
Will I pay NI on that if I'm below the 5k threshold? I've got a letter requesting excemption from class 2 NIC due to never earning enough from it.
£150 is better than nothing too.
-
Will I pay NI on that if I'm below the 5k threshold? I've got a letter requesting excemption from class 2 NIC due to never earning enough from it.
£150 is better than nothing too.
Threshold for NI is around £107 per week (PAYE/Tax threshold is £156). If You pay NI (its not much) but you would be able to claim it back end of the tax year.
-
Will I pay NI on that if I'm below the 5k threshold? I've got a letter requesting excemption from class 2 NIC due to never earning enough from it.
£150 is better than nothing too.
If you already earn over £35k in your job, you're likely to pay 40% tax plus NI on top of that on your £200.
-
Will I pay NI on that if I'm below the 5k threshold? I've got a letter requesting excemption from class 2 NIC due to never earning enough from it.
£150 is better than nothing too.
If you already earn over £35k in your job, you're likely to pay 40% tax plus NI on top of that on your £200.
I'll never earn that much in a technician role so no worries there!
-
I'll never earn that much in a technician role so no worries there!
20% + NI then :thumbup:
-
Sounds like a bit of a crappy situation, If you let them have the photos then it'll end up that you become the departmental photographer which if you can wangle a pay rise through and get them to buy some of their own gear then may not be a bad thing, but that probably won't happen they'll just expect you to use your own gear.
Realistically they can at least pay you the overtime for doing it, if they don't do that then they aren't getting the photos, but whatever happens make sure you remain pleasant etc you don't want to do anything to jepordise your job which is probably worth more to you than £200.
-
you won;t need to pay any tax on it
each year when you send your self assessment off, just make sure you put some of your gear down as costs, and make the costs add up to more than you earn from the photos
that way you never make a profit, so never pay tax
(on the photos anyway)
and if you put something expensive down, so you make a big loss, you can carry that loss forwards to the next year ;)
you can put stuff like fuel down too... (to go take the photos) but it's probably not worth the making it that complicated ;)
-
This has made me wonder, should I register my silversmithing stuff? I'm guessing I could claim back vat on all my materials and tools. This could help quite a lot!
-
but then you'd have to charge 20% vat on everything you sell...
in the long run, you're better off not being vat registered if you don't have to be
(unless what you sell wouldn't have vat on it anyway like food etc..)
it's "value added tax" so essentially it just takes away 20% of your profit
-
you won;t need to pay any tax on it
each year when you send your self assessment off, just make sure you put some of your gear down as costs, and make the costs add up to more than you earn from the photos
that way you never make a profit, so never pay tax
(on the photos anyway)
and if you put something expensive down, so you make a big loss, you can carry that loss forwards to the next year ;)
you can put stuff like fuel down too... (to go take the photos) but it's probably not worth the making it that complicated ;)
Handy tips, especially when chances you'll have bought something that could be put towards the costs.
-
This has made me wonder, should I register my silversmithing stuff? I'm guessing I could claim back vat on all my materials and tools. This could help quite a lot!
You can only claim back vat if you're vat registered. What knighty is saying is you can offset your profit and losses for your income tax bill
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
-
Spoke to them yesterday, apparently going and photographing a sign for media and marketing purposes is covered under the section of 'any other duties' of my contract, so they won't pay me.
She flinched a bit when I mentioned solicitors... :D
-
id stuff the job & go for constructive dismissal
-
It's probably not worth the agro, I'll need a reference from them when I hopefully move this year. I am tempted though to just say "OK, then I'll have the photo back I took in my own time with my own equipment and you can pay me to go out there and do it again during office hours with office equipment".
-
It's probably not worth the agro, I'll need a reference from them when I hopefully move this year. I am tempted though to just say "OK, then I'll have the photo back I took in my own time with my own equipment and you can pay me to go out there and do it again during office hours with office equipment".
thats what I would do - then email her link to your own business site where you sell photos, where you happen to have the photo on display for £400.
-
Well I apparently need to also declare my "photography business" as a potential "Conflict of interests". Just as I did that I received an email from the Professor who is in charge of the project the photo was needed for, asking if I'd been paid yet.
She'll be speaking to the deputy dean (Person who said they won't pay me) and if he won't budge, has said she'll take it to the Dean. So the show isn't over till the fat lady sings apparently.
(Neither of them are fat btw)
-
Well I apparently need to also declare my "photography business" as a potential "Conflict of interests". Just as I did that I received an email from the Professor who is in charge of the project the photo was needed for, asking if I'd been paid yet.
She'll be speaking to the deputy dean (Person who said they won't pay me) and if he won't budge, has said she'll take it to the Dean. So the show isn't over till the fat lady sings apparently.
(Neither of them are fat btw)
she sounds like she needs a kick in the sponge.
-
9. Exclusivity of Service
9.1 You are required to devote your full time, attention and abilities to your duties during working hours and to act in the best interests of the University at all times. Full time staff may not hold any other paid appointment nor enter into an obligation to undertake any external work without the prior approval in writing of the University. Before you enter into an obligation to undertake any paid external work, including consultancy, you must inform the University through the person to whom you are accountable. The University will then decide (within 5 working days or whatever other period may be agreed as being reasonable in all the circumstances) if that work will
a) interfere with the performance of your professional/managerial responsibilities, or
b) compete or conflict with the interests of the University.
If either a) or b) apply, the University may at its sole discretion require you not to undertake the work. Such a requirement will not be made unreasonably, will be subject to full consultation with yourself and, if made, will be accompanied by full written reasons for it.
9.2 Where it is intended to use the facilities of the University in connection with external work, then prior approval of the University is required in accordance with procedures as set out in the Staff Handbook.
So at the very least I can request the full written reasons, which'd be good, I'll wait and see what happens with the Professors chasing it. It's bad timing as the Deputy-Dean has had a loss in the family this week so it's a delicate time for kicking up a fuss!
-
sounds like it'll all get sorted out to me, once you kick something far enough up the food chain it just takes someone with a bit of common sense to say "yeah that's fine" and then it'll trickle down and all get sorted out
even better when the Professor who wants it is the one asking about it
-
Full time staff may not hold any other paid appointment nor enter into an obligation to undertake any external work without the prior approval in writing of the University. Before you enter into an obligation to undertake any paid external work, including consultancy, you must inform the University through the person to whom you are accountable.
Surely since the university was the client for your external work they've implicitly given their agreement for you to undertake it anyway. Was the person who agreed to pay you for the photo also the person you report to - that would seemingly tick that box?
-
I don't think you'll get paid for the photo I do think you could argue for the overtime.
Its not external work but then it is internal which would be within your duties... Only difference is that you did it in your own time which equates to overtime.
If they refuse overtime payment. You refuse them the right to use your photograph.
Though to sell your photographs on a stock photography site would require the permission of the university due to your contract but in worse case you're in breech of contract so the uni can do what exactly? fire you?
Now you're down to calling their bluff.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
-
Yeah it's internal, it's not within my duties, but is covered under "Any other duties as required". Though yes I do use a camera on occasion in my role, the subject and context of the photo is such that I don't think it's that much different than if they'd asked the Dean of the school to do it. It'd be any other duties for her too.
Worst case scenario I take a day off work in lieu of overtime.
When it comes to the stock photos, I've been very careful the last few years. Pretty much all the ones I sell are taken in my own time with my own equipment. I was made aware of the contract that any photos taken during working hours, no matter what the subject etc, are joint copyright with the university.
I'm not fussed about calling their bluff, though the professor who wanted me to take the photos talked to me yesterday and sounds pretty gobsmacked about how the school is handling it. As she said, they needed the photo at short notice as they were falling behind the "in house" media team (basically a consultancy from the media school) would have charged thousands for it. I saved the school a lot of money and got the job done in half the time it would have taken had they gone down the apparent "preferred" route.
Just yet another example of the crazy inner workings I guess. Another good one is that we were told we couldn't buy a piece of equipment because it cost £500, we didn't have enough money to buy it so we'd need to find one that cost over £1000 so it could go through a different purchasing system :dunno:
-
On the plus side a Sky Broadcasting company has just bought a 1024x768 photo I took in 2008 for £100 :D
Looking at Getty's pricing scheme for images, I should have invoiced the university £500 easily for the resolution image they got.
-
Looking at Getty's pricing scheme for images, I should have invoiced the university £500 easily for the resolution image they got.
Not really, because you're not a professional photographer.
-
How do you come to that conclusion? You'd be correct if you use the literal definition of a "professional photographer" being someone who earns 100% of their income through photography, but I'd say a large proportion of "professional photographers" do it as a side business like me.
This shouldn't factor into how much someone gets paid really. Just because I have a day job doesn't mean the photo I take is any different to the one someone who does it full time takes. I used the same level of equipment you'd expect (a 7d may not be a 1d or 5d, but I use L-series glass), have professional photography insurance, and am registered with the tax office. I also use the same work-flows and processing that a full-time photographer would use.
I didn't go out with a point and shoot camera, take a snap and go "that'll do".
-
Looking at Getty's pricing scheme for images, I should have invoiced the university £500 easily for the resolution image they got.
Not really, because you're not a professional photographer.
The price for a service/demand for something someone is willing to pay doesn't correlate to who owns/provides the service.
I could charge £10/75/100 an hour depending on who I talk to, what they want and what I feel they would fairly pay for my services.
-
How do you come to that conclusion? You'd be correct if you use the literal definition of a "professional photographer" being someone who earns 100% of their income through photography, but I'd say a large proportion of "professional photographers" do it as a side business like me.
This shouldn't factor into how much someone gets paid really. Just because I have a day job doesn't mean the photo I take is any different to the one someone who does it full time takes. I used the same level of equipment you'd expect (a 7d may not be a 1d or 5d, but I use L-series glass), have professional photography insurance, and am registered with the tax office. I also use the same work-flows and processing that a full-time photographer would use.
I didn't go out with a point and shoot camera, take a snap and go "that'll do".
Being a good photographer doesn't really have anything to do with what kit you've got, it's about training, experience, an eye for composition etc. All these attributes when brought together into a single package are valuable and (arguably) deserving of higher remuneration. If, because you take a 18mp shot, you believe that your image should command the highest premium, you (in my opinion) do a disservice to gifted, full-time photographers.
-
The price for a service/demand for something someone is willing to pay doesn't correlate to who owns/provides the service.
Of course it does. If one finds a company or individual particularly capable, higher remuneration for their services is excepted; does experience and ability count for nothing?
-
you've missed his point.
I can wash my car. but if i can find someone who'll do it for £6, which saves me getting the hose out, filling a bucket, washing it near the outdoor tap, then tidying up.... that means that the price is defined by the amount im willing to pay to save me the hassle.
that said, would i be willing to to pay extra for a touchless car wash? yes i would. but thats about the service, not the owner.
-
Looking at Getty's pricing scheme for images, I should have invoiced the university £500 easily for the resolution image they got.
Not really, because you're not a professional photographer.
The price for a service/demand for something someone is willing to pay doesn't correlate to who owns/provides the service.
I could charge £10/75/100 an hour depending on who I talk to, what they want and what I feel they would fairly pay for my services.
I'm 50/50 on this... I can understand Nige charging according to the customer and he presumably varies his service slightly according to this too.
We do a similar thing where I work... I guess the term is economic sabotage - the software we sell to big banks we'll charge millions per year in license fees, maintenance contracts, consultancy etc.. some tier 2 bank can have the same software for a few hundred k but it will be deliberately limited somewhat and they don't get to customise it as much.
Supermarkets do this too where they sell more-or less the same thing in different packaging as part of their el chepo range so they can still get some $$$ from pikeys without reducing profits form normal customers.
With the photography thing I've got mixed views... on one hand a gifted amateur can be as good as some professionals - on the other hand you might expect to pay more for a professional over a part time person because you'd expect to have more consistent results simply due to the level of experience. Say an amateur does some part time paid work then they'd surely need to have a very very good portfolio to be able to market themselves at the same rate for shooting someone's wedding etc.. as some full time guy who's got a variety of commercial work, wedding shoots, fashion shoots etc.. on his website.
On the other hand, when selling stock photography, the sale is basically based on the image itself. I can see why some might object to Zpyder's charge in this thread as his image wasn't selected after comparison with lots of other images on some stock photography site rather he was able to lock in his fee purely as a result of being employed by the university. Then again its a hobby he takes seriously and I'm sure the image was of a decent quality.
-
you've missed his point.
I can wash my car. but if i can find someone who'll do it for £6, which saves me getting the hose out, filling a bucket, washing it near the outdoor tap, then tidying up.... that means that the price is defined by the amount im willing to pay to save me the hassle.
that said, would i be willing to to pay extra for a touchless car wash? yes i would. but thats about the service, not the owner.
This is a good analogy because I've been looking for someone to come out and professionally detail my car; prices vary massively along with the particulars of the service offered. It's not as B&W as experience = more money, the same way that a service sold in London will probably cost more than one sold in Lincoln.
-
Being a good photographer doesn't really have anything to do with what kit you've got, it's about training, experience, an eye for composition etc. All these attributes when brought together into a single package are valuable and (arguably) deserving of higher remuneration. If, because you take a 18mp shot, you believe that your image should command the highest premium, you (in my opinion) do a disservice to gifted, full-time photographers.
I think you may have misinterpreted, or I may have badly worded what I was trying to say. I'll put my hand up and admit that when it comes to the photography business I lack experience. Photography wise, I'm fairly more solidly grounded, though I am constantly learning and developing my skills. My original statement though was based in my lack of the business experience. I simply don't know what to charge when approached...it was an eye opener looking at Getty's pricing schemes, and what people are willing to pay for images of low resolution. I had thought something at 1024x resolution would be pretty worthless. FYI, I have images on Getty, that meet their criteria for composition, artistic and technical. My portfolio includes National Geographic, Discovery channel, BSkyB (now), as well as other minor publications.
That experience in the actual business side of things is the only thing I'd say is missing in the "single package" you mention. When approached regarding the university commission, I brought to the table over a decade of photographic experience, I arranged meetings to discuss client requirements, I arranged for permission to photograph on the private property and laid out the terms and conditions of the commission, all in a professional manner. The package included several images and videos in several formats. Nothing was different from what a full time photographer would do, bar the price. My statement was a realisation that occurred during my learning processes of the business, that in all likelihoods I had undercharged. Do you believe that my lack of experience in handling my business would mean I should proportionally adjust my prices to account for this? Is this what you were meaning?
Additionally, regarding kit, yes, it's possible to take amazing pictures with cheap kit. However training and experience has taught me that some lenses are more sharp than others, and more suitable than others in certain situations. I used that training and experience to use a weather sealed lens and body that covered the requirements of the shoot in a dusty and contaminated environment.
-
I'm 50/50 on this... I can understand Nige charging according to the customer and he presumably varies his service slightly according to this too.
We do a similar thing where I work... I guess the term is economic sabotage - the software we sell to big banks we'll charge millions per year in license fees, maintenance contracts, consultancy etc.. some tier 2 bank can have the same software for a few hundred k but it will be deliberately limited somewhat and they don't get to customise it as much.
Is this the same as charging a varying fee based on the quality of the image? Full res being millions, and lower resolution being 100k? Or would this be more based on who the client was. Eg, low price for a charity, and higher fee for say, Microsoft. I guess it's both, low-profit companies or charities get a scaled version of the image etc.
With the photography thing I've got mixed views... on one hand a gifted amateur can be as good as some professionals - on the other hand you might expect to pay more for a professional over a part time person because you'd expect to have more consistent results simply due to the level of experience. Say an amateur does some part time paid work then they'd surely need to have a very very good portfolio to be able to market themselves at the same rate for shooting someone's wedding etc.. as some full time guy who's got a variety of commercial work, wedding shoots, fashion shoots etc.. on his website.
I believe that a large portion of business/professional photography is marketing and advertising. I'd say a lot of "amateurs" probably have as much experience as a professional, and produce consistent results, but they either lack the desire or knowledge to market themselves as a business.
I can see why some might object to Zpyder's charge in this thread as his image wasn't selected after comparison with lots of other images on some stock photography site rather he was able to lock in his fee purely as a result of being employed by the university. Then again its a hobby he takes seriously and I'm sure the image was of a decent quality.
Well, yes and no. Getty and other stock sites were looked at, the fall back was to use an image that would cost £500, from Getty. However the RA on the project had seen my portfolio after one of the few bits of advertising I've done, and one thing led to another. If they weren't happy with the image when compared to the stock images, they could have used those instead so the quality would have been comparative. There is also the in-house media department within the University, so it's not as though I stole the business exactly.
-
you can charge as much as anyone willing to pay
and for something like a photo, it doesn't matter who/where it comes from, you look at the quality of the photo and if it's what you want you buy it, if it isn't then you don't
and for hobby vs professional... I'm sure most of us have been into somewhere like PC world and been shocked by the quality of the knowledge of the people working there.... so in the same way, I'm sure there's plenty of 'professional' photographers who are complete morons and don't know a thing about taking photos
-
I'm 50/50 on this... I can understand Nige charging according to the customer and he presumably varies his service slightly according to this too.
We do a similar thing where I work... I guess the term is economic sabotage - the software we sell to big banks we'll charge millions per year in license fees, maintenance contracts, consultancy etc.. some tier 2 bank can have the same software for a few hundred k but it will be deliberately limited somewhat and they don't get to customise it as much.
Is this the same as charging a varying fee based on the quality of the image? Full res being millions, and lower resolution being 100k? Or would this be more based on who the client was. Eg, low price for a charity, and higher fee for say, Microsoft. I guess it's both, low-profit companies or charities get a scaled version of the image etc.
Well its not so much a comparison with photography more a comparison with Nige's mention that his charge's are different depending on the customer. Its gets a bit funny and I'm not a sales person so I'm not sure how they've ended up doing some of the deals they do (some of them I don't think we make much money on - small client being charged a fee per trade instead of paying for a license then finding out the volume of FX deals they do is akin to some small firm selling people travel money...). But essentially the same core bits of software is sold to different people for different prices depending on who they are, how they're intending to use it etc... Obviously additional customisations/ehancements and support for the larger clients (and they can do more with the software or have more scope to configure it) whereas smaller clients (small US banks) might have some hosted solution on some box in a data center which they share with some other banks and they're somewhat more restricted...
Well, yes and no. Getty and other stock sites were looked at, the fall back was to use an image that would cost £500, from Getty. However the RA on the project had seen my portfolio after one of the few bits of advertising I've done, and one thing led to another. If they weren't happy with the image when compared to the stock images, they could have used those instead so the quality would have been comparative. There is also the in-house media department within the University, so it's not as though I stole the business exactly.
Ah fair enough then...if there was competition in so far as other options were exposed then I don't see the issue - they paid what they felt was worth paying....
-
Ah fair enough then...if there was competition in so far as other options were exposed then I don't see the issue - they paid what they felt was worth paying....
...well, they agreed to pay, were meant to pay, but someone else decided they weren't going to :dunno:
Still waiting to hear back from the professor on that one. It's now transpired that the administrator who initially put a stop to this has been moved up into a central role, rather than overseeing our specific school, and we will be getting new line managers. So i'll give it a month or two and then test the waters with the replacements!
-
Latest development...my contract isn't being renewed in July as my post is no longer required...despite the fact that the team is short staffed WITH my post.
This fiasco, combined with another recent development, probably hasn't put me in good favour with the line manager.
Don't know why I am pissed off, as I'd intended on leaving in August anyway...
-
well... and least you've got nothing to lose now ;) ;) ;)
-
keep an eye out to see if they re-advertise your post or even change the name slightly. Then have fun & games with tribunals.
-
How long do they have to wait before they can re advertise? I suspect they're going to make the role term time only, or severely alter it to stretch the duties further. Either way they probably expect me to come running when they make a new post available, but I've decided I need to break away from the university so that likely won't happen, I just hope they sort something out for my remaining colleagues, as they're way overworked, now only 2 staff covering what should be about an 8 person team.
Sent from my GT-N8010 using Tapatalk HD
-
Well at least its only a month that your missing out on and not longer but I imagine its annoying never the less. These sort of things sometimes might not seem like much at the time but can count against you. Hoepfully you'll move onto something better, well after a little while off just as the sun comes out, nice for some :D
-
they can readvertise instantly. they've ended your contract, not made you redundant. so theres no rules wrt to readvertising or reemploying.
-
Notification of end of contract though states "the position is no longer required and is as such redundant", in those words. Isn't that essentially making me redundant, in the sense they're not renewing because the position isn't needed, and that they would renew it if they did need it?
Sent from my GT-N8010 using Tapatalk HD
-
its till only a contract. you're not being made redundant so its not under the same employment laws.
-
Fair enough. Still going to fight for them to keep the position, not for me, but for the poor students that are going to end up being told that there will be no science practicals for a few weeks as the one technician left is off work on stress. I fully intend on travelling and then working elsewhere.
-
its till only a contract. you're not being made redundant so its not under the same employment laws.
Wrong. Lots of contracting loopholes got closed. Goverment want contracts to be classed as employees when possible.
There has been cases where Employee X has been cleaning offices of company 123 for on behalf of company ABC. Company ABC lost the contract, Employee X lost her job.
Employee X won a tribunal case against company 123 despite not even working for them, but as an assimilated employee!!!
If its a fixed term contract, you still have employee rights. If Spyder has been there for 2 years in the same role, then they have to show the post is redundant. If they re-advertise it, then Spyder has the employment law on his side.
quick outline here
https://www.gov.uk/fixed-term-contracts/renewing-or-ending-a-fixedterm-contract
-
Don't know if this should be a new thread tbh:
Here's a summary of me and my employment here. I suspect all the way along the university has been quite sneaky and squeezing as much out of me as they can:
Student 2004-2008
2008-2012 Employed on PTHP (Part Time Hourly Paid) contracts spanning from 2 months to 9 months at a time, usually with less than a few weeks gap between them. Though they are “part time” I in essence worked a normal 37.5 hour week. The only difference in how things are handled is that there is a pot of money, and you fill in a daily time sheet. As opposed to getting a salary.
2012-present fixed term (as opposed to PTHP) salary job.
This year I had the fiasco with the photography, but also more recently, I’ve had declined a request for PPE (personal protective equipment) – not legal, as well as in the same week I get the letter saying the post isn’t being renewed, there was a bit of a fuss kicked up regarding the universities finances.
The short story is that the PhD students were left out of the loop. This resulted in a lot of gossiping. You could see it spiralling out of control, and it was only a matter of time before those PhD students talked to their external funders, which would have been very, very serious. As such I passed on some of the PhD students comments from a closed facebook group (taking out names) to a school staff rep. The students were promptly then brought up to date, situation diffused.
However, in the process, this rep went and saw my line manager, deputy dean (responsible for not paying for photos) and explained the situation. Later that day the rep came and told me to be wary as she wasn’t sure if she made clear to the dep-dean that the facebook comments were just passed on by me, as opposed to my own comments/me stirring the pot.
The following day the dep-dean sent a rather patronising email to the PhD students. This prompted one of the students to reply in what can only be described as “an epic burn”…copying in the dean and all PhD supervisors.
Two days later I get the letter about the post being closed.
I’m fairly sure that despite having been an employee here for 5 years, and the total gaps between my short-contracts probably being less than the equivalent paid annual leave a permanent member of staff would get, the way the school has managed these contracts means that whereas a fixed term contract running for 4 years = entitlement to a permanent position, I have no such rights.
I’m tempted to call ACAS to find out what my rights are, I suspect none, and ultimately I’ve already decided I do not want to work here any longer so there’s not much point fighting it, other than fighting for the benefit of my colleagues/team/friends.
-
So, had the meeting today. I am being made redundant. I was surprised that I've been given redundancy pay for 4 years continuous service, equates to about a little over a months pay. If I sign a non compromise waiver this gets doubled.
Pretty gutted for the state the school will be in come term time. Apparently all the academics have been going and voicing their support/concern about the loss of the position.
Kind of makes me glad to get out, also means that I now have the money I would have wanted to earn over summer, up front :)
Sent from my GT-N8010 using Tapatalk HD
-
a better outcome than ccould have otherwise been expected. good work.
-
Just waiting now, apparently they aren't able to confirm the proposal until next Wednesday.
I have a sneaking suspicion there's been so much uproar over the decision they might decide to renew the post.
-
4 weeks and a bit pay is standard stuff. 1 week per year served think my terms are the same.
So you're not a contractor, I.e. self employed. You're just talking about a fixed term employment contract.
Non-compete? Or non-compromise?
I'd take the redundancy and then wait until they re-advertise and apply again. :/
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
-
Non-compromise.
Will not be able to work at the Uni for 4 weeks. Which is fine, as i'll get 8 weeks pay.
However I won't know till next Weds or later if they are going ahead with the redundancy. So there's a chance enough fuss has been kicked up that they decide to keep the post after all.
Which is a shame as I'd already decided to buy the MP-E 65mm lens with the money...!
-
sounds like someone wants you out, who may not have the full power to make that kind of decision.
Might be worth making sure you get some extras in your package.
You must have something of employee rights for them to offer double.
Id make sure the least the can do is to give a glowing reference when required. As well as other things you can think of - like not stoping you doing business with the university for any future commissions, etc.
IF they do decide to keep the position... then negotiate a pay rise.
Theyve already offered you redundancy after all.... Ball will be firmly in your court.
-
HR has confirmed the redundancy this morning, which is awesome :D
-
I've never known someone so pleased to be made redundant lol, congrats :thumbup:
-
it's more money than I'd have got if I'd have stayed at uni for 2.5 months, which is longer than I'd intended, second I sign the agreement I'm buying the mp-e 65mm lens!
Sent from my phone.
-
it's more money than I'd have got if I'd have stayed at uni for 2.5 months, which is longer than I'd intended, second I sign the agreement I'm buying the mp-e 65mm lens!
Sent from my phone.
and then down the jobcentre to sign on & phone the council for a council tax reduction :D