Freelancers do not need 'blanket employment benefits', says PCG

This article was migrated from an old version of our website in 2025. As a result, it might have some low-quality images or non-functioning links - if there's any issues you'd like to see fixed, get in touch with us at info@journalism.co.uk.

The vast majority of freelancers do not want redundancy pay, the head of public affairs for the Professional Contractors Group (PCG) , the cross-sector representative body for freelance workers, has said.

Reacting to the National Union of Journalists' (NUJ) call for MPs to back more rights for freelances who are losing work during the recession, Simon McVicker said accepting redundancy pay would be taking on a hallmark 'associated with being an employee' for a freelancer.

"This would be very detrimental to their efforts to show that they are operating a genuine commercial entity, not a vehicle for disguised employment. That is entirely contrary to what true freelancing is," he said in a statement to Journalism.co.uk.

"The efforts of the NUJ to secure blanket employment benefits for all freelancers are, we regret to say, deeply unhelpful and against the interests and desires of the vast majority of freelancers."

Vickers also challenged some of the conclusions made by the All Party Parliamentary Group for the Freelance Sector in its recent report on freelancers' rights.

In the report the group said it was concerned at the plight of media industry workers who are called freelance, or 'casual', when in fact they would wish for permanent positions.

"We would like to see the definition of the word 'worker' broadened to include all dependent workers and that these workers should have a statutory entitlement to workers' rights on a pro rate basis," it said.

The NUJ raised concerns in response to the report that journalists doing casual shifts under present legislation often fall into the category of someone with fewer rights them an 'employee', but more than a purely self-employed person.

The PCG 'contributed much evidence to this report', but has found 'some difficulties' with its conclusions, said McVicker.

"Our approach and tone is markedly different from that of the NUJ," he explained.

The organisation will not support any legislation that is aimed at specific industries, such as the media industry, within the freelance bracket. Many freelancers including successful journalists would rather continue working as 'true freelancers' as defined by the PCG, he said.

Legislation directed at once specific group is not necessary, he added.

"We do not believe that it is either helpful, desirable or necessary to suggest appropriate periods of time for freelancers to work on a particular contract," said McVicker.

"Neither do we accept that the government is right to question the credibility of some of those freelancing and we would have preferred a limited liability enterprise to have been referred to as a limited company."

The PCG does support workers who find themselves 'freelancing unwittingly', he said, adding that vulnerable workers deserve 'compassion and support'.

However, he stressed that the experience of these individuals should not be confused with the situation faced by the vast majority of freelancers, who 'wish to preserve their true commercial status and not be unfairly dragged into an employment relationship with their clients'.

The PCG welcomed the parliamentary report and urged the government to act on its recommendation to set up a study group aimed at producing a definition of freelancing, he said.

The PCG is already working on this issue, he added.