Tradies Fees

Forums › Home Workshop DIY › Tradies Fees

1 | 2 | 3

gregmcc

2092 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1952574 6-Feb-2018 19:32

mattwnz:

gregmcc:

Bung:
chevrolux: Health and safety costs money. So yes.

So do a lot of other business costs. Why make "Health & Safety" a separate item? Does the customer have the option of requesting a Careless Friday job?

The actual H&S levy paid to the Government is 8 cents per $100 of payroll.

It brings to mind the electricians charging for the CoC or ESC as if they had the option of walking off the job without testing.

The H&S levy is the ACC levy, what about all the demands worksafe place on employers, there is no actual levy but there is quite a large compliance factor. Hazard ID's safety inspections of equipment etc. all of which has to be paid for somehow.

The "Tradie" is just making sure that these charges are noted as Govt compliance costs.

As far as an CoC or ESE charge, these are legal documents required by law, lawyers charge for legally required documents, why shouldn't anyone else who is required to generate a legal document make a charge for it?

At the end of the day separating out these charges highlights how much of the hourly rate is eaten up by govt compliance

So do you think they are trying to make a point by seperating it out and highlighting it? I would have thought if they were doing that, it would need to be the actual amount. There are lots of other compliance costs that businesses have to pay and pass onto the customer. But that is usually built into the hourly rate or fees. The hourly rate usually covers overheads as part of running the business. Imagine if a retail shop started charging all these fees as addons to the product price.

Don't think comparing H&S risks between a retail shop and a tradie is fair, every single job the tradie goes to would have a different set of risks requiring that those risks are evaluated each time, a retail shop would remain the same about 98% of the time so it's much easier to include this as a cost of the product price.

And yes they are trying to make a point about compliance costs, when it's highlighted it tells the customer that the hourly rate seems reasonable, but the compliance costs are an unavoidable add on, rather than a big huge hourly rate that seems too high with no justification.

Backblaze

Backblaze Unlimited Backup. World’s easiest cloud backup. Get peace of mind knowing your files are backed up securely in the cloud (affiliate link).

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1952587 6-Feb-2018 19:56

gregmcc:

mattwnz:

gregmcc:

Bung:
chevrolux: Health and safety costs money. So yes.

So do a lot of other business costs. Why make "Health & Safety" a separate item? Does the customer have the option of requesting a Careless Friday job?

The actual H&S levy paid to the Government is 8 cents per $100 of payroll.

It brings to mind the electricians charging for the CoC or ESC as if they had the option of walking off the job without testing.

The H&S levy is the ACC levy, what about all the demands worksafe place on employers, there is no actual levy but there is quite a large compliance factor. Hazard ID's safety inspections of equipment etc. all of which has to be paid for somehow.

The "Tradie" is just making sure that these charges are noted as Govt compliance costs.

As far as an CoC or ESE charge, these are legal documents required by law, lawyers charge for legally required documents, why shouldn't anyone else who is required to generate a legal document make a charge for it?

At the end of the day separating out these charges highlights how much of the hourly rate is eaten up by govt compliance

So do you think they are trying to make a point by seperating it out and highlighting it? I would have thought if they were doing that, it would need to be the actual amount. There are lots of other compliance costs that businesses have to pay and pass onto the customer. But that is usually built into the hourly rate or fees. The hourly rate usually covers overheads as part of running the business. Imagine if a retail shop started charging all these fees as addons to the product price.

Don't think comparing H&S risks between a retail shop and a tradie is fair, every single job the tradie goes to would have a different set of risks requiring that those risks are evaluated each time, a retail shop would remain the same about 98% of the time so it's much easier to include this as a cost of the product price.

And yes they are trying to make a point about compliance costs, when it's highlighted it tells the customer that the hourly rate seems reasonable, but the compliance costs are an unavoidable add on, rather than a big huge hourly rate that seems too high with no justification.

BOLDED. Thats the reason.

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1952664 6-Feb-2018 21:17

tdgeek:

gregmcc:

Don't think comparing H&S risks between a retail shop and a tradie is fair, every single job the tradie goes to would have a different set of risks requiring that those risks are evaluated each time, a retail shop would remain the same about 98% of the time so it's much easier to include this as a cost of the product price.

And yes they are trying to make a point about compliance costs, when it's highlighted it tells the customer that the hourly rate seems reasonable, but the compliance costs are an unavoidable add on, rather than a big huge hourly rate that seems too high with no justification.

BOLDED. Thats the reason.

Not to mention most tradies still have to have a premises AND come to yours... They're not like retail at all.

Seems like most here would rather just pay the $200 an hour it would cost with no breakdown...

I wonder if that's because it's way the people in the IT industry work?

Here's a thought... Don't like the price? Do an apprenticeship and fix your crap yourself, because those against tradies making a living are obviously all geniuses that think tradies know nothing and just charge actual money because begging isn't fashionable.

blackjack17

1624 posts

Uber Geek

#1952671 6-Feb-2018 21:34

H&S compliance should not be a big expense. Systems should be set up and once set up followed. They do need reviewing but yearly is sufficient.

Some business are taking it to extreme and requiring more than what is required but most H&S is common sense.

Being non-compliant can be a big expense.

I am a health and safety rep, my wife is a health and safety compliance manager, my brother is a builder and father a flooring contractor.

We did my brother and father's documentation in a couple of hours.

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

webwat

2036 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1952683 6-Feb-2018 22:41

Yorkshirekid:

The TOTAL cost was over $500; the part cost $245. The apprentice did the job and the other guy watched over. I had no idea an apprentice was coming along.

I get that the fuel cost cover the van etc. But TEN TIMES what is required; that's not on. If I'd live three times the distance away I think the fuel cost would have been exactly the same. It should be adjusted for distance. And they came twice - once to spec and the second to fix. I know another business in town who's standard fuel fee is $20, so I guess I should be happy :-)

To my mind, health 'n safety is a government cost to the business, not the customer. Will we be paying their ACC fees next?

I'm happy to pay the trade fee; skilled ppl should get paid. It's just the add-on's that are the nark. Nobody pays me to drive to work.

So you assume that cost of running the van is all that is required? Perhaps the tradie won't mind if his boss tells him he's driving around town for free because nobody wants to pay him to get to the job? And the apprentice has to go on the jobs for free unless customers willing to pay them? You obviously didn't want to wait for the apprentice to be on holiday so that you could get a one man team instead of the one that was available. Nobody would be willing to do small jobs if there was heaps of mucking around without being paid for it. I get that a bit too, with small jobs you try to charge only a reasonable amount but inevitably small ones aren't worth doing if theres any other work on.

Time to find a new industry!

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#1952698 6-Feb-2018 23:46

gregmcc:

mattwnz:

gregmcc:

Bung:
chevrolux: Health and safety costs money. So yes.

So do a lot of other business costs. Why make "Health & Safety" a separate item? Does the customer have the option of requesting a Careless Friday job?

The actual H&S levy paid to the Government is 8 cents per $100 of payroll.

It brings to mind the electricians charging for the CoC or ESC as if they had the option of walking off the job without testing.

The H&S levy is the ACC levy, what about all the demands worksafe place on employers, there is no actual levy but there is quite a large compliance factor. Hazard ID's safety inspections of equipment etc. all of which has to be paid for somehow.

The "Tradie" is just making sure that these charges are noted as Govt compliance costs.

As far as an CoC or ESE charge, these are legal documents required by law, lawyers charge for legally required documents, why shouldn't anyone else who is required to generate a legal document make a charge for it?

At the end of the day separating out these charges highlights how much of the hourly rate is eaten up by govt compliance

So do you think they are trying to make a point by seperating it out and highlighting it? I would have thought if they were doing that, it would need to be the actual amount. There are lots of other compliance costs that businesses have to pay and pass onto the customer. But that is usually built into the hourly rate or fees. The hourly rate usually covers overheads as part of running the business. Imagine if a retail shop started charging all these fees as addons to the product price.

Don't think comparing H&S risks between a retail shop and a tradie is fair, every single job the tradie goes to would have a different set of risks requiring that those risks are evaluated each time, a retail shop would remain the same about 98% of the time so it's much easier to include this as a cost of the product price.

And yes they are trying to make a point about compliance costs, when it's highlighted it tells the customer that the hourly rate seems reasonable, but the compliance costs are an unavoidable add on, rather than a big huge hourly rate that seems too high with no justification.

I wasn't specifically meaning the H&S costs when it comes to a retailer, although the retailer would also have some H&S requirements as an employee with staff. But I don't see how the complaince cost being charged has anything to do with each job, as it looks like it was just a set fee they charged per job, rather than based on the actual risks of that particular job. Generally if a job is harder or more risky, I would think it would be better to instead charge a higher hourly rate to compensate. A retailer however has other overheads that tradies don' t have, such as a retail shop itself (rent, power, depreciation of fittings) staffing, and all the costs associated with that. These are often costs that online shops don't have, but people still expect physical stores prices to be the same as online shops. So imagine if retail shops did charge the same as online stores, but the charged a convenience fee for being able buy from a local shop, rather than waiting days or weeks for the item to be delivered. People wouldn't accept that. My point was more that all business have different costs, but most will build it into either the product price or hourly rate. For a trades person I would expect to pay for the parts they use, their hourly rate, and usually mileage to the job. Other overheads related to running the business, such as compliance costs, IMO should be built into the hourly rate or parts margin. Higher risk jobs, charge a higher hourly rate instead.

Bung

5433 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1952736 7-Feb-2018 06:37

blackjack17:
H&S compliance should not be a big expense. Systems should be set up and once set up followed. They do need reviewing but yearly is sufficient.

Normal best practice should be built into the hourly rate. Specific items like scaffolding for working at height are an obvious separate cost. As a customer I would want to know in advance what this was. It might be better to arrange this myself if there was other work needing it.

nickb800

2699 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1952800 7-Feb-2018 09:35

tdgeek:

gregmcc:

mattwnz:

gregmcc:

Bung:
chevrolux: Health and safety costs money. So yes.

So do a lot of other business costs. Why make "Health & Safety" a separate item? Does the customer have the option of requesting a Careless Friday job?

The actual H&S levy paid to the Government is 8 cents per $100 of payroll.

It brings to mind the electricians charging for the CoC or ESC as if they had the option of walking off the job without testing.

The H&S levy is the ACC levy, what about all the demands worksafe place on employers, there is no actual levy but there is quite a large compliance factor. Hazard ID's safety inspections of equipment etc. all of which has to be paid for somehow.

The "Tradie" is just making sure that these charges are noted as Govt compliance costs.

As far as an CoC or ESE charge, these are legal documents required by law, lawyers charge for legally required documents, why shouldn't anyone else who is required to generate a legal document make a charge for it?

At the end of the day separating out these charges highlights how much of the hourly rate is eaten up by govt compliance

So do you think they are trying to make a point by seperating it out and highlighting it? I would have thought if they were doing that, it would need to be the actual amount. There are lots of other compliance costs that businesses have to pay and pass onto the customer. But that is usually built into the hourly rate or fees. The hourly rate usually covers overheads as part of running the business. Imagine if a retail shop started charging all these fees as addons to the product price.

Don't think comparing H&S risks between a retail shop and a tradie is fair, every single job the tradie goes to would have a different set of risks requiring that those risks are evaluated each time, a retail shop would remain the same about 98% of the time so it's much easier to include this as a cost of the product price.

And yes they are trying to make a point about compliance costs, when it's highlighted it tells the customer that the hourly rate seems reasonable, but the compliance costs are an unavoidable add on, rather than a big huge hourly rate that seems too high with no justification.

BOLDED. Thats the reason.

That's the idea, but the responses in this thread to such an add-on charge question whether it's a good idea. Seems to be objection to the principle of the an add-on by some, and objection to the overall cost by others. Perhaps tradies need to get their customers to complete a personality questionaire before issuing a customised invoice!

1101

3086 posts

Uber Geek

#1952838 7-Feb-2018 11:10

Yorkshirekid:

I get that the fuel cost cover the van etc. But TEN TIMES what is required; that's not on. If I'd live three times the distance away I think the fuel cost would have been exactly the same.

You still havnt stated what the callout fee was .

The callout fee is also for TRAVEL TIME .
Ive spent 3hours++ in a day just traveling between jobs, stuck in traffic etc. Someone has to pay , its going to be the customer who wants onsite work.If you want the job done at your house, you need to pay for the time to get there, thats a standard charge.

Adding on $10 for this and that , that only makes customers angry.
Its just the boss being a cheapskate . I had a boss who would add on charges for cleaning, use of fax or internet , any little thing he would add onto
the bill.
For the sake of $10 its not worth the anger it causes .

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1952889 7-Feb-2018 12:34

Are there any threads here where people recommend tradies? I always put off getting people in for the above reasons. I need an electrician and plumber for small jobs at my place (North Shore, Auckland) and a good TV guy to check out and properly sort my aerial situation. Any tips?

1101

3086 posts

Uber Geek

#1953082 7-Feb-2018 16:06

bazzer:

and a good TV guy to check out and properly sort my aerial situation. Any tips?

prepare for a price shock if the Arial is on the roof :-)
Full scaffolding now required , just to go on the roof & check the Arial . Cant just climb up via a ladder & walk around on the roof.

Would H&S be the reason 2 guys turned up at the aircon job being discussed.
Perhaps they have to allow for H&S laws demanding 2 guys , ie lifting heavy aircon units, or 2nd guy to hold ladder . So will allways be 2 sent to the job ?

cadman

1014 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1953161 7-Feb-2018 17:53

1101:

bazzer:

and a good TV guy to check out and properly sort my aerial situation. Any tips?

prepare for a price shock if the Arial is on the roof :-)
Full scaffolding now required , just to go on the roof & check the Arial . Cant just climb up via a ladder & walk around on the roof.

Why would there be a font on his roof?

Someone's spent waaaaaaay too much time in MS Word...

RickW

297 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1953288 7-Feb-2018 20:07

1101:
bazzer:

and a good TV guy to check out and properly sort my aerial situation. Any tips?

prepare for a price shock if the Arial is on the roof :-)
Full scaffolding now required , just to go on the roof & check the Arial . Cant just climb up via a ladder & walk around on the roof.

Would H&S be the reason 2 guys turned up at the aircon job being discussed.
Perhaps they have to allow for H&S laws demanding 2 guys , ie lifting heavy aircon units, or 2nd guy to hold ladder . So will allways be 2 sent to the job ?

This is 100% not true. The controls put in place are in relation to the job being done(the longer the job and a greater risk mean you need better controls in place. If you just need someone to look at an aerial on your roof having someone foot the ladder is still 100% acceptable. As per the working at heights best practice guidelines released by worksafe they use the words practicable and reasonable they don’t expect a whole roof to be scaffolded to look at an aerial as that would take all of 15 mins even replacing the aerial would only take 30 mins max time on the roof.

1101

3086 posts

Uber Geek

#1953487 8-Feb-2018 09:29

RickW:

This is 100% not true. The controls put in place are in relation to the job being done(the longer the job and a greater risk mean you need better controls in place. If you just need someone to look at an aerial on your roof having someone foot the ladder is still 100% acceptable. As per the working at heights best practice guidelines released by worksafe they use the words practicable and reasonable they don’t expect a whole roof to be scaffolded to look at an aerial as that would take all of 15 mins even replacing the aerial would only take 30 mins max time on the roof.

From the govt website
"Short duration work at height shall be treated the same way as any other activity at height"
"For low-risk, short-duration tasks, scaffolding or a harness is unlikely to be required."

So short duration tasks both do & do not require scaffolding or harnesses . Just what is low risk anyway?

Also, the published guidelines do not reflect the current laws
"While this guidance has not been updated to reflect current work health and safety legislation (the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 and regulations)"

Seems its just a confusing mess with no definite answers.
Why even put up guidelines that are no longer relevant ?

1 | 2 | 3