Thousands of Finns as "enterpreneurs" against their will

Where to buy? Where can I find? How do I? Getting started.
Post Reply
User avatar
Hank W.
The Motorhead
Posts: 29980
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 10:00 pm
Location: Mushroom Mountain
Contact:

Thousands of Finns as "enterpreneurs" against thei

Post by Hank W. » Fri Oct 10, 2003 10:01 am

There is an interesting article in today's Helsingin Sanomat (Finnish ed. still) of this phenomenon of required of having "toiminimi". Basically started as outsourcing, the end result is people who want "a paid job" end up as "enterpreneurs" without any clue of what is going on. Except when they decide to try get unemployment benefits etc. and find out they aren't entitled to anything. The big companies outsourcing do this to avoid the huge costs of having people on payroll, and the "enterpreneur" has to do double the work with less money. Also without the ability to have a vacation or get sick.

And then the politicians ask stupid questions "why don't you want to be an enterpreneur"...


Cheers, Hank W.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.

Thousands of Finns as "enterpreneurs" against thei

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

User avatar
roopemills
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 8:58 am
Location: Helsinki

Post by roopemills » Fri Oct 10, 2003 1:34 pm

Now it's also in Helsingin Sanomat International Edition:

http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp?id=20031010IE5

I know a few people who have been pushed into this situation, Finnish and non-Finnish, from both large and medium-sized companies. Seems to me like one of those loop-holes that bad employers can exploit to save money. The law should be changed regarding this practice since in many cases the "entrepreneur" is essentially just an employee with limited (or no) rights and benefits.

dusty_bin
Posts: 2208
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 10:56 pm
Location: Estonia
Contact:

Post by dusty_bin » Fri Oct 10, 2003 2:01 pm

An entrepreneur is a very different thng to a subcontractor, although a subcontractor might also be an entrepreneur. These firms are privatising the jobs as they are 'non core', important but not essential; at least if the firms are doing it right.

It is a strange thing that in socialist paradise, workers have less protection than in the UK...

brendan_uk
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:26 pm

Post by brendan_uk » Fri Oct 10, 2003 2:36 pm

It is a strange thing that in socialist paradise, workers have less protection than in the UK...
Its the same in the uk. The government were happy to let companies get away with it untill they realised some of the new "enterpreneurs" were using the tax advantages of having a company to their own benefit.

So instead of putting the burden back on the employers it went to the "enterpreneurs" in the form of IR35.

I am a managing director of a company which I own completely. This doesnt stop me being treated like any other employee in the government :shock: office I work in.

As far as I know there is a EU directive which is trying to make this manoevre more difficult as government lose revenue, especially in things like pensions and health care.

If I remember correctly it states that you have to basically prove you are not just like any other employee in terms of multiple clients, working hours, etc. Otherwise you will pay tax (and national insurance) as if you were an employee, thus removing any incentive to take this route.

So the current arrangement in finland looks to be out of step with the rest of europe
These firms are privatising the jobs as they are 'non core', important but not essential; at least if the firms are doing it right.
Of the 7 people working in the IT dept here only one (the manager) is permenant the other 6 are "enterpreneurs" hardly non-core :( [/b]

dusty_bin
Posts: 2208
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 10:56 pm
Location: Estonia
Contact:

Post by dusty_bin » Fri Oct 10, 2003 2:50 pm

From your perspective, IT may be core, but increasingly it is seen as a service to the firm. In amost all cases, services to the firm are not essential to the core competance of the business.

There is an ongoing debate in some circles as to whether IT is service to outsource. In general, the IT folk, of course, say it is a core function as it protects their employment position. A more pragmatic onlooker asks 'can somebody else do this?', if as in most cases the answer is yes, then outsourcing is usually a viable option.

Brendan is right about the impetus for rolling back the tide of outsourcing in the UK is the taxation issue, no matter where it comes from, the effect is to dissuade firms from going too fast. down the outsourcing route.

I don't think that FInland and the UK are the same in this respect. The UK employment market is more open in the first place and because the UK is a little further down the road, there are some protections, even if due to taxation issues.

Undoubtedly the FInnish gov't will catch up, but by then it may be too late, given the the small size of the market and the relatively strong position of, particularly, foreign employers, including Nokia who already outsorce very strongly.

brendan_uk
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:26 pm

Post by brendan_uk » Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:12 pm

From your perspective, IT may be core, but increasingly it is seen as a service to the firm. In amost all cases, services to the firm are not essential to the core competance of the business.
I take your point about IT being a service in general, but when someone loses their password or pc fails, the response of "hang on I'll just outsource that requirement and put it to tender getting 3 different quotes" is hardly the answer they expect.

I would be happy if I was the employee of a software firm which took care of a companies IT needs, much like building maintenance. An employee of this company would be good to, but these jobs arent available and businesses like to employ on contract for the flexability, cost and budget allocation work arounds it gives them.

The losers are the "entrepeneurs" and the company as a whole as long term going concern.

Its pure shortsightedness by the current crop of managers if you ask me

Tom and Jerry

Post by Tom and Jerry » Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:30 pm

The Finnish tax office usually doesn't accept small companies who have only one customer. They have this policy for quite a long time, and most people I spoke with are damned well aware of this. It also gives a risk for the company that has this practice: taxes, salaries and insurance have to be paid backwards, it the tax office doesn't accept this 'company'.

So, old news.


Vero-oppaassa yritystoiminnan tunnusmerkit määritellään seuraavasti:

“Elinkeinotoiminta, maatalous ja muu tulonhankkimistoiminta on itsenäistä, kun toimintaa harjoitetaan omalla riskillä, omilla työvälineillä ja aineilla, yrittäjä tarjoaa palvelujaan yleisesti, yrittäjä vastaa itse kaikista kustannuksista, hän on huolehtinut itse omasta sosiaaliturvastaan ja on vakuuttanut toimintansavahinkojen varalta. Yrittäjätoimintaa voidaan harjoittaa toiminimellä, avoimena yhtiönä tai kommandiittiyhtiönä, osakeyhtiönä tai osuuskuntana.”

User avatar
deojuvame
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 11:43 am
Location: Helsinki

Post by deojuvame » Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:32 pm

I *hate* this business practice with a passion, and it's shocking to discover that it's a widespread practice.

I always thought it was just my company that was completely evil and short sighted.

My company is going around saying they're laying off people right and left, but it's not like you would notice the difference- people are working in the same exact workstations, doing the same exact job, but technically they're not really working for the company. Corporations are absoltely begging for some corporate espionage with this practice- I'm willing to bet there's a lot of "entrepreneurs" willing to return the favor they got from thier company... :evil:

User avatar
Hank W.
The Motorhead
Posts: 29980
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 10:00 pm
Location: Mushroom Mountain
Contact:

Post by Hank W. » Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:34 pm

brendan_uk wrote: If I remember correctly it states that you have to basically prove you are not just like any other employee in terms of multiple clients, working hours, etc. Otherwise you will pay tax (and national insurance) as if you were an employee, thus removing any incentive to take this route.

So the current arrangement in finland looks to be out of step with the rest of europe
No its not, this is exactly what the finnish "enterpreneurs" have faced all along and what is the stuff "not told" by the outsourcers. The int'l translation is much abridged. I'll see if I can get myself arsed enough to do in the missing pieces once I get the paper in front of me at home. I have a few links (albeit in finnish) that calculate what your asking "price before VAT" needs to be to make you get say 5 euros an hour.
Cheers, Hank W.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.


Post Reply