Would not like to try that one in court as a means of defence, oooops no licence or even if the police push it worse
Definiton via wiki.
"Remuneration is considered the pay or other compensation provided in exchange for the services performed; not to be confused with giving (away)"
I work as a contractor therefore submit an invoice for my services following a period of work, yet I am whilst working a representative of the company I work for. HQAC really are going to have to have a re-think. If they deduct tax and NI, then you are in effect an employee. HMRC Iâm sure could take a very dim view if tax is being evaded by semantics, just look at the BBC employeeâs.
I was told that even if you are being paid, it is OK because you are paid to be an adult instructor, not a driver - apparently this is how schools get around it because teachers can occasionally drive the schoolâs minibus because it is only a small part of their job.
No idea if that is backed up by lawâŚ
Wouldnât like to try and rely on that one in court if there is a major incident with a minibus.
Yes but your Intention as a contractor is to claim pay at the time you do the work, itâs your job, your intention to volunteer may not be the same.
I think that as Tango-Foxtrot has said we are covered by other things anyway.
I only get paid a month later on the submission of an invoice to the company.
Do you not submit a claim or invoice for the time spent on CFAV activities, if so are you an employee, otherwise any renumeration should just cover out of pocket expences, so that you are not left out of pocket. HQAC and CFAVs are skating on very thin ice using the renumeration ploy. Do you pay your own tax and NI on the âpay/renumerationâ or are they deducted directly by HQAC for HMRC against you tax code and NI number.
If they do, I argue you are an employee not a volunteer as volunteers are not paid/renumerated except for out of pocket expences.
I suggest that other things that you âthinkâ may cover you because if they donât it could come back to bite you very very hard. Do you think HQAC downwards would support you in a court case, youâd be on your own as they would back pedal so quickly youâd not see them for dust.
And, for those who have professional qualifications that would also have disciplinary implications with a professional regulator. If I break the law and appear in court for an offence and am found guilty I can have my qualification removed from me. That would mean I am no longer legally able to practice my profession.
I brought this up when I was possibly being elected as a Civ Com chair and was concerned that any legal action under Charity Law and I could legally be held to account for acts and omissions. I was told that this was a correct assesment ofthe situation.
Many CFAV have no idea that professional qualifications could be at risk by any acts or omissions. In my profession any criminal convictions even cautions are reported by the police by law to the regulator for consideration of disciplinary action. That includes something as simple as a traffic offence.
Considering the confusion around (pay/remuneration/volunteer allowance) plus Tax and NI being deducted at source in a PAYE fashion I daresay that the scene is set for eventual discontinuation of financial incentive.
Renumeration, pay, call it what you will, If you receive money for driving a minibus and you hold a B1 licence you are breaking the law. Out of pocket expenses only can be paid. D1 (101) can be paid whilst operating under the permit 19. NO P19 you can not be paid, nor operate the bus for Sqn use as you will need an operators licence and CPC, because the cadets pay subs and those subs go towards the operation of the bus. Therefore the passengers are paying for a service and then it becomes commercial. Schools are not exempt this rule, teachers with B1 are under the spot light, as they could be seen as being paid to teach and driving a minibus could be seen as part of that job. So that is why permit 19âs and 22âs are being scrutinised by parliament.
Which takes us back to the DfT letter of clarification which says that youth groups & community groups who do not provide transport as a primary purpose are exempt. So paying subs to be a member of the organisation who run activities and happen to use a bus to get to them is not the same as paying to be a member of a club for whom travel is the sole purpose.
Thank you, you have said exactly what I was trying to allude to with the relevant licencing conditions.
So when a uniformed CFAV signs on the dotted line is it in effect a contract of employment and itâs my belief subject to employment law with all the requirements of the law. Now the RAFAC has in effect removed the Comission covered by RAF law, which therefore came under the military under the various Armed Forces Acts, it leaves them liable under civil law for any unfair dismissal, harrasment etc.
Those who drive minibuses really need to consider the comments above in relation to the law and its application as it may come back to bite them.
âThe service consists of an occasional (rather than regular) activity,
organised on a voluntary basis (with an unpaid driver) for a specific
group of people. This could include day trips undertaken on an ad-hoc
basis where the passengers share the costs;â
The term is unpaid is relevent as uniformed CFAVs are paid therefore outside the legislation and are potentially breaking the law. Like anybody employeeâs are paid following their work time not in advance. As CFAVs are paid per diem not an hourly rate, duty therefore employment starts when the uniform is donned not when you arrive at a venue.
Would you like to stand in either the Coroners or High Courts using the hair splitting of paid or unpaid in the RAFAC.
Why do you think that D1(101) licence holders can receive payment for their driving services, but B holders can not?
Driving minibuses under a B licence comes with the caveat âNot for Hire or rewardâ.
Driving minibuses under a D1 is subject to conditions dictated by the codes. a 101 code sets the condition of âNot for Hire or rewardâ.
Surely, then, if driving under an RAFAC issued Permit 19 is classed as âfor Hire and rewardâ, Both B, and D1 (101) are breaking the conditions set, and are therefore driving not in accordance with their Licence?
As I stated, the moment you put on the uniform you are being paid per diem therefore are operating outside the licence conditions the second you take responsibility for the vehicle by obtaining the keys for it.
I understand that - Iâm trying to understand why people think that there is a difference between B and D1 (101) licence holders.
No you arenât. I wear uniform all the time and Iâm paid for very little of it.
So your driving a minibus on one of your 28 paid days, what happens then?
Nothing, as it says in that link DAWS posted above. It isnât aimed at us, Iâm not being paid for driving the bus.
iâd like to see that one in court with a good prosecution barrister against you and the RAFAC
As an SI, I wear uniform for each and every activity but Iâm not paid for ANY of it.
How does this apply to service personnel driving on a FMT600 then?
Our Wing minibus was grounded due to this P19 issue last Thursday by the way.