Editor's comment: Keep health away from the taxman

Editor's comment: Keep health away from the taxman

It’s welcome news that the industry is waking up to the cost of poor health among its staff. An unhealthy workforce means absenteeism and loss of productivity, which can impact on the quality and accurate delivery times of projects, with a consequent effect on profit margins.

The Constructing Better Health (CBH) organisation, which CJ supports, is trying to combat poor health by promoting an industry-wide scheme to provide on-site occupational health screenings for all staff, including those of subcontractors.

CBH believes many main contractors are keen on the scheme and it reckons that the value of occupational health screenings is reaching a growing number of small- and medium-sized firms. The Health & Safety Executive has also been promoting the benefits of looking after the occupational health of staff.

All of which is very encouraging news. But there is a fly in the ointment in the shape of that old industry bogeyman, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC).

Contractors are worried that if they provide proper occupational health screenings for subcontractors, the Revenue may pounce on this as evidence that these workers are directly employed. It would be a crying shame if such a laudable and, surely necessary, initiative is stymied by the taxman before it can even take root.

HMRC’s view of the matter is typically cryptic: provision of occupational health screening might be an indication that the worker is directly employed, but it is unlikely to be the single determining factor.

The future health of the industry’s workforce is too important to be caught up in a tangle of ever changing employment case law.

Let’s keep it simple. If contractors are willing to provide occupational health screening to their subcontractors, this should not be used against them by the taxman.

James Atkinson, Deputy editor, Contract Journal, 5 July 2006