1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

leaving Capita

Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by bigfloorpie, Mar 13, 2011.

  1. Ive just taken this fromanother post about Capita or key pay not paying NI contribution, this was after looking at the standard contract between capita and the school.
    'The charges section 3.2 - 3.4 talk about NI contribution, apparently the
    cliant is supposed to pay. It does say that the fee to the school
    includes commision AND NI contributions, however I keep reading many
    posts which talk about key pay not paying NI contributions. Is this
    legal as the schools are paying the NI (even if it is included in whole
    with the fee) '
     
  2. As far as I'm aware, it shouldn't be, as Employer's NI contribution is just that, and technically, the client (school) is not the employer. The gross funds that I bill Capita for, with my timesheet, is for my services (i.e my wages). Regardless of what they say they have in their contract with the school and with Key, Employer's NI contribution cannot come out of fees due for the temporary woker's (ie the supply teacher) services. The daily rate I agreed with Capita was not inclusive of Employer's NI - that was never mentioned when they called me up to tell me about the l/t placement I am currently at.
    Anyway, as far as their contracts with the school go, Employer's NI contribution should be taken out of the gross amount that the agency charges the school, not the gross amount that the agency hands over to the teacher.
    I would still suggest taking advice from your union. I think it's about time that both unions and schools stood up to parasitic companies like Capita that treat teachers in such a shabby and despicable manner. They are a multi-billion pound a year company - they can afford to pay Employer's NI contributions. The old lie about them having to reduce their running costs in order to maintain a profit margin is the same lie that the government is peddling to justify cutting public services.
    Greed is gutless.



     
  3. Right. I'm assuming you have eyeballed this particular contract before, because the bit on the timesheet means NOTHING. It means nothing because when you enter into a contract, there has to be full disclosure of the terms by each party in order for the contract to be lawful BEFORE ANY CONSIDERATION HAS TAKEN PLACE.

    For instance, I can't sell you a CD player with a contract that says (inside the plastic wrapper). "Now you have bought this item, in order to use it, you must pay me £10 a week". No siree. It doesn't work like that.


    Regarding employers NI, unless you are a limited company, in order for your "pimp" not to get anally raped by HMRC, they must charge this, otherwise you get dragged into the furore that is "the LEA are your employer and if I am pimping you out to ONE LEA, I must do your PAYE and your NI". If I don't, I will feel the big ***** of big brother up my bottom. Without lube. I gather the conservatives were going to get rid of IR35 (which is a nasty jealousy tax) but perhaps haven't......like so many of their pledges. Labour brought in IR35 as they are jealous trotskyites and kept the wording so wooly that if they decide they want a piece of your lily white ass, they will have it.


    Don't mess with HMRC and don't overstep IR35. Your pimps and people who could be aiding and abetting the pimps knows this and have it sewn up. If you would like to run the gauntlet with the tax man, you will need to go limited, however, this carries it's own risk as if they decide to ferk you up, they will. A big agency will prefer to pimp you out as a limited company as it means if anything goes wrong, you get raped. That's pretty much the long and short of it.....however, given the costs and the state of supply, it is probably easier to come and work for me.
     
  4. Capita has been totally useless for us done absolutely nothing-We are with a great agency that has OUR concerns and has treated as well-However, I dont know about their policy and NI. I can supply u details if u want to switch.
     
  5. I would agree with you about Capita, but if your agency is so wonderful, and your are trumpetting this fact, why not tells us. i did PM you, but you did not reply.
     
  6. What is key?
     

  7. I joined Capita this week and was told that if I did NOT go through Key then I would get a lesser daily amount than through them.
    Is this correct? Seems odd.
     
  8. Capita was one of the first agencies I joined, two years ago. My experience of them is best described as 'lots of fuss but no action'. They seemed very professional; I had a general interview followed by a subject specific one, and then had to fill in a computerised health screening, which lead to a strange telephone conversation with a 'nurse', before being passed as fit to go. After this, nothing. For a while, Capita kept in sporadic contact, saying things like 'keep these dates free on your calendar, as we will have work for you then' but nothing ever materialised. I paid for a CRB but, suspiciously, I never received a copy of it, so I wondered whether my cash had just been taken and the check never done.

    Verdict, useless.
     

Share This Page