ARE YOU BETTER OFF AS AN EMPLOYEE?
The question worth sitting with
There is a story that gets told a lot in the weeks after redundancy. You were working for someone else. That arrangement ended without your say. So now you take control. You go self-employed. You become the person who cannot be made redundant because you are the one making the decisions.
It is a compelling story. It is also, for a significant number of people, the wrong one. Not because self-employment is bad, but because for many workers in many circumstances, employment is genuinely better. Not just emotionally safer. Financially better. And the people who discover these six months into a difficult first year of freelancing, with bills arriving and client work inconsistent, tend to wish someone had told them earlier.
So here it is: a genuine, unsentimental look at whether employment might actually be the stronger option for you.
What your employer was paying for, that you did not see
When you were employed, your salary was not the full cost of having you. Your employer was also paying employer National Insurance contributions at 13.8 percent of your earnings above the threshold. They were contributing at least 3 percent of your qualifying earnings into your pension under auto-enrolment. They were providing statutory sick pay when you were ill, paying you for annual leave, and covering any employer liability insurance that applied to your role.
None of that money passed through your hands. Which means most people have no feel for its actual value until it stops. If you go self-employed, you now carry those costs yourself, or you simply go without them. The pension contribution alone is worth several thousand pounds a year for most workers. Statutory sick pay, which is not generous, is still something. Holiday pay is something. These are not abstract benefits. They are money, and they matter to the comparison.
The real costs of self-employment
The most common mistake people make when evaluating self-employment is to take their day rate, multiply it by the number of days they plan to work, and call that their income. It is not. It is their gross revenue before costs.
From that revenue, you pay: income tax on profits, Class 2 and Class 4 National Insurance, any accountancy fees (a competent accountant for a sole trader costs between 500 and 1,500 pounds per year), professional indemnity or public liability insurance depending on your work, any software or equipment you need, and the cost of the time you spend on administration, business development, and chasing payment. None of that is billable.
You also need to account for gaps. You do not bill for sick days, bank holidays, annual leave, or the weeks where you have finished one project and the next is not confirmed yet. For most freelancers, that amounts to six to ten weeks of unbilled time per year. If you do not build that into your rate, those weeks come directly out of your income.
Run the full calculation. Not the optimistic one. The one that includes accountancy, insurance, gaps, and a rough estimate of your administration time. Then compare that to what employment would offer. For many people, the honest comparison is closer than they assumed.
When self-employment does make sense financially
There are sectors and skill sets where the contracting market genuinely pays rates that make the numbers work. If you are a senior software developer, a qualified accountant, a project manager with a strong track record, a lawyer, an engineer, or a designer with a clear portfolio, the market may well pay you at a level that comfortably absorbs the costs of self-employment and leaves you better off.
The critical factor is not just the rate you can charge. It is whether you have the professional relationships and reputation to maintain a consistent pipeline of work. Most people who have worked in employment for a long time have skills that the market values. Fewer have the established network to convert those skills into reliable work from month one. The gap between those two things is where the financial case for self-employment most often breaks down in the early months.
Job security is not what it used to be, but employment still has a structure
The standard argument for self-employment is that job security is an illusion anyway, and you have the evidence to prove it. That is fair as far as it goes. Employment does not guarantee permanence. You have just found that out.
But the risk profile of employment and self-employment is different in ways that matter. Employment concentrates your income dependency in one employer, which is a risk, but it wraps that risk in statutory protections: redundancy pay, notice periods, the right to claim unfair dismissal after two years of service, and the ability to claim Universal Credit or Jobseeker's Allowance if things go wrong. Self-employment spreads your dependency across multiple clients, which does reduce concentration risk. But if two or three clients simultaneously reduce their spending, as happens reliably in economic downturns, your income can fall faster than it would in employment, and there is no equivalent safety net.
Neither structure is objectively safer. They carry different kinds of risk; and which kind you are better equipped to handle, depends on your savings, your domestic commitments, your personal tolerance for uncertainty, and the specific market you would be operating in.
The case for employment if you are still building your career
There is an argument for employment that rarely gets enough attention: structured development. Good employers invest in the people who work for them. They fund training, provide mentorship, offer routes to progression, and put you in the room with people and problems that develop your professional judgement, in ways that isolated self-employment simply cannot replicate.
For anyone under forty who is still accumulating the skills and relationships that determine long-term earnings, the development value of a strong employment role may well outweigh the short-term financial appeal of going it alone. This is particularly true in technical fields where certification and structured learning matter; and in industries where the relationships you build inside organisations become the foundation of everything that comes later.
If your redundancy payment gives you any breathing room at all, use some of that time to make this decision properly, rather than reactively. Run the actual numbers for both paths. Talk honestly to people who have made each one. Think about your domestic situation and your financial reserves. Consider speaking to an independent financial adviser before committing to either direction.
Self-employment is not better than employment in the abstract; and employment is not necessarily better than self-employment. What matters is which one fits your actual circumstances, your genuine skills, and the specific moment you are in. Taking the time to work that out is not procrastination. It is how you avoid making an expensive mistake in either direction.