What has Jeremy Clarkson done ?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

It's the BBC.

BTW, have you ever read any contract you'd get from this sort of organization?

[John Rumm]

It depends on if we are talking about a fixed term contract *of* service (i.e. to all intents a contract of employment), or a fixed term contract

*for* services - a business to business contract made on (broadly) equal terms that does not create an employment. The latter can't "own" the service provider since it implicitly acknowledges that the provider does not work for them.

Also where you have an individual that has multiple and diverse streams of income (e.g. TV work, writing, public speaking, sponsorship etc) chances are they will consolidate the whole lot through their own company anyway - so someone contracting in that form would appear to the BBC as an employee of a third party company, and not a freelancer in the traditional sense.

(having said that - theatrical contracts and case law differ from normal business practice)

[Capitol]

If you are a real freelancer, you write your own contract, very carefully.

[Tim Streater]

It depends on who thinks they have the upper hand in the relationship; that defines whether the BBC can just say sign here, or whether Clarkson's agent can tell the BBC to sign here.

[bert]

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes

Was he employed freelance or was he engaged through a production company. Not the same thing.

[bert]

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes

As opposed to an employment contract when it does own you.

[bert]

In message , Tim Streater writes

Mr Plowman and he knows everything. Lest that's what he told me.

[bert]

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes

I used to write them.

[bert]

Have you been reading IR35?

[Adrian]

Top Gear's produced by the BBC directly, not through a third party production company.

Clarkson and his missus are directors of a company called Newincco 1189 Ltd, through which his services will be engaged by the BBC.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Not so. In a large organisation, staff contracts are subject to agreements between the employer and union in many cases. And that union will have had them carefully scrutinised.

Very few free lances have the ability or resources to do this so simply sign them.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I've at least attempted to read and understand several free lance contracts from assorted broadcasters, before signing them. And also seen ones issued to talent. Nowhere have I said I've seen Clarkson's contract, so am merely giving an informed guess.

Now please tell us how many such contracts you've read and signed?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

For whom? The BBC? Have you then seen Clarkson's actual contract?

[John Rumm]

I doubt there are many in my industry who are not intimately familiar with it ;-)

(note that while IR35 status is based on employment case law, it only affects taxation status, so has little relevance for employment and contract issues outside of tax)

[John Rumm]

Could you clarify what you mean by a freelance contract though? Are you talking about a contract with an individual trading as a self employed individual, or are you talking about a contract with an incorporated body offering the services of one or more individuals?

[tim.....]

do you really think that "million pound" talent gets given the same "take it or leave" it contract that a freelance sound man gets?

tim

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I'm willing to bet quite a bit of it is the same. Written by the same team of lawyers.

Unless, of course, you know different?

I was once given an artist contract by mistake. Not from the BBC, but from a very large broadcast company. Was actually pretty similar.

[Tim Streater]

Well quite a bit of it would be. But, ultimately, it depends who has the power going into the relationship. If the "talent" has it, he'll dictate the important terms. The rest is just boiler plate that one would expect to be the same.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Experience of the BBC says they ain't going to give up their 'rights' for anyone.