<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unfair Competition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/02/06/unfair-competition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/02/06/unfair-competition/</link>
	<description>An Employment Law Blog by a UK barrister</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:55:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Usefully Employed</title>
		<link>http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/02/06/unfair-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Usefully Employed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:38:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/02/06/unfair-competition/#comment-13</guid>
		<description>At my for-the-meantime-secret-yet-currently-useful employer we have a department which sells IR35 insurance to IT contractors, so I&#039;m well aware of what they earn. For many of them it probably is about comparable with your average barrister. I don&#039;t think they&#039;re greedy at all, I just don&#039;t have a handle on how on earth government projects end up costing so many more times than was originally planned. IT projects are a key target, but look at any major public project, the Olympics, Wembley, the naff-looking Scottish Parliament. The reasons for targeting barristers are surely due to their one-man-band easily-bullied status. I think if you told the average guy on the street that the defence costs for all of the major cases in a year were £176M he&#039;d be unsurprised, but if you told him that government routinely spend nine figure sums on abortive projects which don&#039;t deliver &lt;i&gt;anything&lt;/i&gt;, he&#039;d be rightly pissed off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At my for-the-meantime-secret-yet-currently-useful employer we have a department which sells IR35 insurance to IT contractors, so I&#8217;m well aware of what they earn. For many of them it probably is about comparable with your average barrister. I don&#8217;t think they&#8217;re greedy at all, I just don&#8217;t have a handle on how on earth government projects end up costing so many more times than was originally planned. IT projects are a key target, but look at any major public project, the Olympics, Wembley, the naff-looking Scottish Parliament. The reasons for targeting barristers are surely due to their one-man-band easily-bullied status. I think if you told the average guy on the street that the defence costs for all of the major cases in a year were £176M he&#8217;d be unsurprised, but if you told him that government routinely spend nine figure sums on abortive projects which don&#8217;t deliver <i>anything</i>, he&#8217;d be rightly pissed off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: simply wondered</title>
		<link>http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/02/06/unfair-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>simply wondered</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/02/06/unfair-competition/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>actually i don&#039;t think software contractors&#039; day rates are a million miles from barristers&#039;. (tho i know less of the latter). the comparison could go further - the gp think barristers get a blank cheque, spout a load of gibberish, dress funny  and when things go wrong claim it was defintely working when they drafted the skeleton and it&#039;s all your fault for being rubbish when giving evidence. and have you tried switching the judge off and on again? (well maybe one can stretch a point...).
why chuck away legal advice when you have paid £100 million for it? because spending the other £900 million won&#039;t make it do what you need of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>actually i don&#8217;t think software contractors&#8217; day rates are a million miles from barristers&#8217;. (tho i know less of the latter). the comparison could go further &#8211; the gp think barristers get a blank cheque, spout a load of gibberish, dress funny  and when things go wrong claim it was defintely working when they drafted the skeleton and it&#8217;s all your fault for being rubbish when giving evidence. and have you tried switching the judge off and on again? (well maybe one can stretch a point&#8230;).<br />
why chuck away legal advice when you have paid £100 million for it? because spending the other £900 million won&#8217;t make it do what you need of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

