11-03-2023, 05:45 PM
(11-03-2023, 05:36 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:(11-03-2023, 05:16 PM)Adsales Wrote: Wrong, for the simple reason that you’re confusing contractual provisions on reputational damage with day-to-day control. The former doesn’t touch IR-35. The second very much.Simply not true. You're conflating a commercial contract with staff rules
The BBC argues he breached impartiality rules. He is, as long as he is not on air or making comments on behalf of the BBC, not subject to those rules. Just as Andrew Neill and Chris Packham were/are not.
But I’ll leave that there as it would derail the thread.
A contract can require anything if both parties agree on signing. What's said, done, auctioned. The parties would just in advance agree scope and limitations.
Like I said, it's easier to control contractors than staff , for lots of legal reasons
IR35, staff social media guidelines, public statements etc are all meaningless in this situation. The only thing that matters is the GL & BBC contract terms
Honest question - have you ever seen an agreement for the provision of services issued by the BBC or any other broadcaster (or business in general)?
Happy to take this to PM to explain to you why you’re wrong.
You’re conflating so many entirely unrelated things.