Our website uses cookies to store information on your computer. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but parts of the site will not work as a result. Find out more about how we use cookies.
(Do not show this message again)
Shout99 - News matters for freelancers Advert
Search Shout99 - News matters for freelancers
(Advanced Search)
   Join Shout99  About Shout99   Sitemap   Contact Shout99 22nd Aug 2014
Forgot your password?
Shout99 - Freelancers, FO35, Section 660
New Users Click Here
Shout99 - Freelancers, FO35, Section 660
Shout99 - Freelancers, FO35, Section 660
Front Page
News...
Freelancers' Shop...
Ask an Expert...
Letters
Direct Contracts
Press Links
Question Time
The Clubhouse
Conference Hall...
News from Partners
Accountants

Login
Sitemap

Business Links

Shout99 - Freelancers, FO35, Section 660

Freelancers' Shop

Personal Financial Services
from ContractorFinancials

Mortgages

Pensions

ISAs

Income protection

... and more special offers for Shout99 readers in the Freelancers' Shop

Shout99 - Freelancers, FO35, Section 660
  
Shout99 - Freelancers, FO35, Section 660

News for the
Construction Industry

Hardhatter.com - News for small businesses in the construction industry

Powered by
Powered by Novacaster
Advertisement
Shout99 Jobs

More wanted from Government plans on late payments
by Susie Hughes at 08:17 06/06/14 (News on Business)
The Association of Recruitment Consultancies (ARC) has argued that more needs to be done in regards to building a responsible payment culture so smaller firms are not disadvantaged by the late-payment syndrome. They have highlighted the recruitment sector as an area where more could be done.
Following the consultation into payment terms last year, Business Secretary Vince Cable proposed that large companies will be required to publish information about their payment practices. ARC has welcomed the review into this area and
the idea that companies should be named and shamed is to be welcomed, but doesn't feel it goes far enough. This view eachoes that of other trade groups, see Government plans on late payments 'don't go far enough' - Shout99, June 2014.

Adrian Marlowe, chairman of ARC, said: “For far too long larger organisations including local and government authorities have forced suppliers to accept lengthy payment terms for services provided and products delivered. It has also been the case that lengthy agreed payment terms have not been adhered to, with the same suppliers being left with the dilemma of deciding to wait for overdue payment, or to enforce the agreed terms.

"Many suppliers are loathe to take firm action for fear of upsetting or indeed losing the commercial relationship, and so interest is lost, cash flow is prejudiced and profits are negatively affected as expensive finance is taken up.

"This is no more obvious than in the recruitment supply sector. We question why any company should be entitled to delay payment to a supplier where the supplier is of labour or individual services and payment is based on hours worked. The client has the benefit immediately and the work should therefore be paid for promptly. Delayed payment can wreck the livelihoods of workers as can the potential collapse of the supplier they work through.

"We would therefore like to see more certainty and believe that this can only be achieved by regulation. We would also like to see the principle extended to recruitment vendors or recruitment process outsourcing organisations (RPO) which are involved in the chain of supply, such that they are obliged to pay their labour suppliers promptly and definitively without the ability to delay payment on a ‘pay when paid’ basis. Currently RPOs have no incentive to agree short or even certain payment terms, rather the converse.”

Codes of practice
Referring to Mr. Cable’s indication that the Government is also seeking to set up sector relevant codes of practice, Mr Marlowe said: “whilst the idea of codes rather than strict regulations appears attractive, in the context of labour supply and RPO a code of practice has existed for several years and the evidence is that it has simply not worked despite the fact that a number of RPO companies did sign up to it.

"This area should be particularly singled out as the current rules are patently unfair. Agency regulations require the agency to pay the workers at normal payment times even though they have not been paid by the client, leaving the supplier agency at a severe disadvantage wherever lengthy or ‘pay when paid’ terms are imposed.”

--
If you wish to comment on this article, please log in and use the Reply button below. Registering is free and easy - see 'Join Shout99'.
-
Susie Hughes © Shout99 2014

Printer Version

Mail this to a friend

Copyright 1999-2012, Shout99.com | All Rights Reserved | Legal Notice
 

Advertisements
advert
advert
advert
advert