safety belt for freelancing means that quality of your network’s work will be low.
yes, a business start with matching people and networking, but in the end is as good as the work it delivers.
i see you put a lot of value on the nomad part of this thing.
maybe it’s a need of yours you are trying to fulfill and not a market’s need?
if i am freelancing and i want to move to another place (city or country)… i will still search my own clients and also keep some of the today ones.
i said it before, but a freelancer without own clients is an employee.
you are a freelancer mainly because you are “built” that way and switching to employee is not an easy thing.
in my opinion, your network is suitable for wannabe freelancers, not for skilled and hard-working ones.
You did not present the law. You gave your words which you claim it’s the law. That’s not the law. That’s your invention.
The law has 7 requirements for independent activity, at least four of them must be fulfilled. I would suggest you to look into it. And do not interpret ‘freedom’ by ‘obligation’. It’s a very big difference.
Unrelated to the topic, but this is not true anymore. You need to comply to at least 4 of the 7 criterias that make a “PFA” non-dependent and the number of customers is just one of them, the others being very easy to comply to. Even this one is easy, as the law says that the “PFA is allowed to have multiple clients”, not “required”.
The number of customers is not one of them. You may have only one, but have the ‘freedom’ to have others. It’s a very big difference between freedom and slavery.
That s not as simple as you explain.
First you assume something that I don t.
If someone comes to me saying I have 10 years of experience in pure PHP, he/she will get a project according to his experience.
Some for the other profile
The first project will be based on my rate calculation and from the end of the project we will do analysis of the end results and readjust what needs to be readjusts for futur works.
For instance there s a backend developer I work with who start very law because I was less aware of the reality and he is now in his normal rate as he expect.
We both evolved as we get to know each others.
One point which is difficult to create between to person who do not know each other is the trust.
With my rate approach I take out one of the point which can bring a partnership in bad situation, the rate.
If we, ALL, agree on a standard then we lose less time in bargaining and more time in making business and we cannot have doubt on what to expect on both side.
As long as you see my business as a marketplace or something similar you could be right however at the end my company deliver to my clients a standard quality so our network can’t be low quality but if a beginner comes to me and his quality is not as expected my approach will help him grow better as long as he/she is a hard worker and willing to evolve. I don t do charity.
My starting point is everybody is willing get fair money for “hard” work (opposed to lazy worker).
But keep in mind this is very far away from what is my company today.
If next year I m able to provide constant work to all my actual partners that would be already a big step.
So far I have only 1 person who get a bit of this.
No, it’s not. The law is very different than what she said.
In order to not fulfill the number of customers criteria, one has to have a contract explicitly interdicting him to work for other customers. Even if that’s the case, that’s only one criteria. One has to fail four or more to have that issue.
As far as I know the law was passed in 2015 with this requirement. I was a PFA back then and my client was working with several of us, after the law we changed contracts and became employees. Other companies created several distinct entities (5+) to pay the contractors.
You should not accuse people, this is not a good spirit special when that person will check with lawyer the status of this legal point which seems to be tricky anywhere in Europe.
For your informations and to prevent any misunderstanding, I will be away for 2 to 3 weeks starting tomorrow, so I guess I will come back to you all after that.
I m glad to have this discussion in any way with you I see that this topic is very important to you and hope we will work together at some point in the futur.
Feel free to add anything necessary and you are more than welcome to prove me wrong on my rate calculation as long as you come with data.
“Opinions matter, data settles things” at least that’s my opinion
What’s the exact law that you are speaking about? When discussing legal matters it doesn’t work with “as far as I know”, but with law numbers and paragraphs
and that s true for all countries, then you add a layer of european laws and country agreement and plus maybe some others technical law details and then you might have a good idea of is the situation.
simple matter
Ok, so I haven’t checked how the law was published, because I’ve closed my PFA before it. At the time everyone heard the same rumour about the need to have multiple clients.
I searched for the law if you want to read it: http://discutii.mfinante.ro/static/10/Mfp/infotva/L_187_2015.pdf
Reading the text, seems you may be right, but I think it’s open for interpretation. I wouldn’t risk it if I’m only eligible for 4 out of the 7 criteria and have just one client.
It’s a very good spirit when they present false information. And look at them, they insist with arguments like ‘as far as I know’ about a law that was changed since then. I presented a link to a lawyer site that has some info about the law. I think it’s quite clear, although not for you, since it’s in Romanian.
We were triggered by the same sentence :))))
