Large Indian Consultancies/IT Companies

[blossom]

The problem is, they ruined things so bad that similar practices might have been adopted by others now. I hope this is not the case - if the contracting world moves to selling "solutions" or "subscriptions" instead of labour.

It also gave a very bad name to Indian IT professionals, simply because these companies overrepresented sub-par talent who willingly subjected themselves to abuse - managements in the US (and UK) went along with it.

This whole business model of leveraging currency/PPP arbitrage and mark-up on other peoples' labour (often achieved by abusive tactics as mentioned earlier in this thread) is wrong on so many levels and I do not consider myself a socialist at all!

Although in India it provided employment to many people in the last decade or two, big outsourcers did not create things of sustainable value. The "onsite" gravy train and higher pay (by Indian standards) that went with it isn't going to last long anyway and the bubble might be bursting.

What did create good IP and technical foundations for sustained growth for India are slow and steady public sector organisations that worked specifically for Indian projects (space research, defence, universal ID scheme that will allow people previously excluded from the organised financial system to receive direct government support etc.).

My post might not help OP in the immediate term, except with insights from first hand experience from the "other" side (working for an offshore company in India for 2 years fresh out of university about 10 years ago).
Quickness (sic) and poor quality was encouraged - giving the impression of spending a lot of time/extra hours was encouraged as opposed to producing actual value - because the real money spinner is "man-days" (sic) sold and not good quality software that provides business value.
The US managers had an attitude of micro-management and an element of smugness at having saved x% per man-day (sic) by moving a job offshore. No one was respected as a professional - because the professional output wasn't the thing being monetised in the first place - it was merely a bum on seat with some keywords on CV for X hours -
which is how I knew I had to get out of this.
(somethings I get the impression that a lot of these practices are cloaked under the garb of agile these days - contrary to the true spirit of agile of course)

It's a shame that indian IT professionals would have their reputation damaged over these corporate behaviours, because I have worked with loads of really great people, either from consultancies, or people who are now independent contractors.

[northernladuk]

Interesting that. The general consensus is that not having notice periods is better for IR35. Having a notice period is indicative of employment. We go in and do the gig and leave when it ends. There shouldn't be a need for a notice period.

I'm quite surprised by the wording of that statement.

Some articles mentioning this are...

Equity Linked — Coming Soon

7. Right of Dismissal or Termination
In a 'contract for services' which is akin to self-employment, the contract is fixed term and
therefore ends on the completion date or on a breach of the contract.
Practical
In most contracts you will find a clause that is entitled 'Notice Period'. This is not a clause you
want in your contract. The notice period is indicative of employment. In a contract of service,
which is akin to employment, the employer and the employee have the right to give notice,
usually about 4 weeks. In a contract for services, the contract should end when the job ends,

e says that, from an IR35 point of view, the best kind of termination clause is one that doesn’t exist, so that there is no notice period either way. But he acknowledges that is an unrealistic scenario, particularly as most clients will insist on a termination clause to protect their projects and deadlines, and contractors will want to protect their income streams against budget cut-backs and project cancellations.

[Brummie]

...
They misread the 'no notice period' to mean that I didn;t have to give notice and could bugger off any time I liked. I discussed with them and they confirmed it actually meant the opposite ...

Exactly what happened to me when contracting through Agency -> Indian IT company -> End Client. Their/My interpretation was completely opposite to the other. They refused when I requested a change in contract with a specific time period 2-4 weeks. Because the end client was IB, I warned and refused to complete internal mandatory compliance courses until an amendment is made. Needless to say, new contract was sent to me within hours.

[blossom]

Interesting that. The general consensus is that not having notice periods is better for IR35. Having a notice period is indicative of employment. We go in and do the gig and leave when it ends. There shouldn't be a need for a notice period.

I'm quite surprised by the wording of that statement.

Some articles mentioning this are...

Equity Linked — Coming Soon

e says that, from an IR35 point of view, the best kind of termination clause is one that doesn’t exist, so that there is no notice period either way. But he acknowledges that is an unrealistic scenario, particularly as most clients will insist on a termination clause to protect their projects and deadlines, and contractors will want to protect their income streams against budget cut-backs and project cancellations.

That last bit - the best kind is one with no clause, so BOTH can get out of the contract at the drop of a hat.

I think that's the opposite of a contract that says "You are not allowed to give notice and must do the full time"

[uk contractor]

Recently I went along to an interview with a well known IB. They had 4 positions for a short term project. The agency I went through put us all down at reasonable market rates. We all interviewed strongly & were just waiting on start dates & background screening according to my agent. Then this specialist UK based IT consultancy who only uses Tier 2 Visa Indian candidates flooded the end client with cv's positioned £100 a day cheaper than my agency so we get blown out & they take on 3 Indian candidates instead! You get what you paid for and all that but proving the discrimination is too much hassle & very hard to do. Nothing to do with where people are from just pure active discrimination against UK born IT workers who are being pushed away for cheaper alternatives all the time. On-shoring is gathering pace is one of the reasons why less IT work around IMO. Finally I can guarantee most Tier 2 Visa workers are never asked to pass background screening for IB's the consultancy will just stand behind a waiver & insurance indemnity against any damages from negligence so again positive discrimination again UK born IT workers.


As per this post I made here:
http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...ml#post2446723
"To qualify for the H-2B visas, hiring companies must attest under the penalty of perjury that they are “likely to suffer irreparable harm” without the influx of workers"


UK Parliament needs to adopt this same measure then watch the number of roles rapidly increase ...and guess what still no IT skills shortage either after home grown talent have filled these roles!

[redgiant]

Interesting that. The general consensus is that not having notice periods is better for IR35. Having a notice period is indicative of employment. We go in and do the gig and leave when it ends. There shouldn't be a need for a notice period.

I'm quite surprised by the wording of that statement.

Some articles mentioning this are...

Equity Linked — Coming Soon

+1

I don't insist on a notice period in my contracts as long as there is mutuality of obligation clause which negates notice periods anyway as discussed on these boards before. If the contract was the end early then I would negotiate at that point with the clientco on a suitable transition period.

[blossom]

+1

I don't insist on a notice period in my contracts as long as there is mutuality of obligation clause which negates notice periods anyway as discussed on these boards before. If the contract was the end early then I would negotiate at that point with the clientco on a suitable transition period.

But having 'No Notice Period' isn't the same as being not allowed to give notice during the contract?

Like you say, if you have the moo clause , you can walk away at any given point ....so that amounts to no notice period.

If you have a 'contractor cannot give notice clause, that means you are obliged to see it out, so either you enter an agreement with you client that says "I can drop you at any time", or you enter into an agreement that says "I can't leave you even if I wanted to". The latter is inside IR35, and that's what the QDOS message is trying to say.

[northernladuk]

But having 'No Notice Period' isn't the same as being not allowed to give notice during the contract?

This is correct and people need to be clearer.

Like you say, if you have the moo clause , you can walk away at any given point ....so that amounts to no notice period.

Nope. MoO is about obliged to give extra work. You are obliged to carry out the work you are contracted to do. MoO isn't about day to day stuff inside the gig as long as you are carrying out whats in the contract.

If you have a 'contractor cannot give notice clause, that means you are obliged to see it out, so either you enter an agreement with you client that says "I can drop you at any time", or you enter into an agreement that says "I can't leave you even if I wanted to". The latter is inside IR35, and that's what the QDOS message is trying to say.

That's where I don't think you are right. You are there to carry out a set piece of work. The best outcome is for you not to be able to leave until the work is done surely? Permies can leave before they finish so having no notice clauses differentiates us from permies. No employment contract can have that in.

[blossom]

This is correct and people need to be clearer.




Nope. MoO is about obliged to give extra work. You are obliged to carry out the work you are contracted to do. MoO isn't about day to day stuff inside the gig as long as you are carrying out whats in the contract.



That's where I don't think you are right. You are there to carry out a set piece of work. The best outcome is for you not to be able to leave until the work is done surely? Permies can leave before they finish so having no notice clauses differentiates us from permies. No employment contract can have that in.

To what extent do you define your work in your contracts? e.g. mine might just say 'IT Programme Manager - Project Blah-di-blah'. It doesn't state what I am there to deliver in a detailed schedule of works...Although I think it probably should? Maybe i'm only engaged to deliver a specific phase, as agreed in the interview. So, if the work is completed, and I have no notice period, what happens then?

Actually, something similar happened to me a few years ago, (but I did have a notice period of 4 week in the contract). My boss had done my contract for 6 months...1 month later he left for personal reasons. two months later I had fulfilled what I had been engaged to deliver (9 months since I started). I suspect my boss had something else in mind or wouldn't have given me the 6 month extension (when I only had 3 months work left to do). I decided to give notice and go do something else, but even though i left mid contract, i totally completed my phase.

[SueEllen]

To what extent do you define your work in your contracts? e.g. mine might just say 'IT Programme Manager - Project Blah-di-blah'. It doesn't state what I am there to deliver in a detailed schedule of works...Although I think it probably should? Maybe i'm only engaged to deliver a specific phase, as agreed in the interview. So, if the work is completed, and I have no notice period, what happens then?

Actually, something similar happened to me a few years ago, (but I did have a notice period of 4 week in the contract). My boss had done my contract for 6 months...1 month later he left for personal reasons. two months later I had fulfilled what I had been engaged to deliver (9 months since I started). I suspect my boss had something else in mind or wouldn't have given me the 6 month extension (when I only had 3 months work left to do). I decided to give notice and go do something else, but even though i left mid contract, i totally completed my phase.

Mine has a list of tasks I carry out and deliverables.