One in the eye for cowboy agencies

[Epiphone]

Oh you poor deluded fool...

Do you think that if the contract between agent and client named you personally as the worker (not your LtdCo), or ensured that any substitutes offered can be vetoed by either the client or the agency, or that you will work 200 days at 8 hours a day minimum (all of which are quite likely to be in there...) that all your carefully argued outside-IR35 clauses are worth a damn?

No I don't. So you're saying that despite what the contract between MyCo and AgentCo says the one between AgentCo and Client is likely to be IR35 caught? If that's the case why bother with a contract at all?

[Epiphone]

Because the contract between the agency and client is more likely to define your work status in Hectors favour. And since you will never see it, much less be able to change it, you're fairly well stuffed.

Fair enough AgentCo won't be falling over themselves to show you the contract between them and the client (it's nothing to do with MyCo after all) but what if you get it in writing from AgentCo that the changes made to your contract are reflected in the end client contract?

[malvolio]

No I don't. So you're saying that despite what the contract between MyCo and AgentCo says the one between AgentCo and Client is likely to be IR35 caught? If that's the case why bother with a contract at all?

Precisely. I had an interview with CP a while back (about the time I decided never to use them ever again for anything) and couldn't get changes made. I then went for what turned out to be the same role through another agency with a Lawspeed contract - and it turns out they are in fact subbing for CP, not the end client. There was no chance that the two agency contracts would support the same agency/client one. I suspect that in the majority of cases, and certainly those with major PSL deals, what the agency puts in your contract has little relation to what's in the next one up the chain.

So there's a reason to be very clear that it is how you work that defines I35, not the contract: as soon as the contract appears to vary from reality, it will be set aside by Gordon's minions.

[mlawren]

Hmm,
I see this thread has turned into an interesting converstion about client-agency and agency-contractor contracts and unless we get an employment/business lawyer on the thread this one could run and run.
My original question was along the lines of "what could agencies do to improve there service to contractors?" or do you in fact care? and everything the agencies are all doing a perfectly good job already?
I would comment, that as a contractor myself and now starting my own agency I have changed my perception on the relationships between contractors, agencies and end-clients. So reading the thread is very interesting so keep em coming...

mlawren

[GreenhitheLee]

You might want to look at my post the other day....

As I am looking for the same sort of answers.....

Some very constructive and valid points there.

[Epiphone]

"what could agencies do to improve there service to contractors?" or do you in fact care?

mlawren

No offense but you should already know a lot of what could be done. There was a thread on this recently but can't find it now.

[malvolio]

TBH I personally have little problem with most agents (barring the usual lack of knowledge of my skills - but then I spent 30-odd years learning my trade!) and treat them as a necessary part of working: I' love to live without them but I can't if I want to keep working since I'm no use at all at marketing and selling. There are some seriously bad ones out there, but they are the big boys and are easily spotted and avoided.

One problem is the market. We got into a position in 2001/2 (well predicted by me and others) where there were more contractors than jobs and agents started adding requirements list to JDs in order to cut down the number of CVs, and then relied on keyword matching to do the hard part. Now we're back with more jobs than contractors in most cases, the agents are stuffed because they've forgotten how to match abilities to requirements. And clients have been conditioned to ask for a list of specific skills ("You must have 10 years C++, SQL, Java and .NET and speak Serbian") rather than deliverables ("I want a website please")

Snag is, it's across the whole industry now. Then we can get on to PSLs and the employee-claims FUD and all the other boring stuff. Basically, the market as it stands now is not helping the contractors and from my own experience it's not really helping the end clients, but since the agencies continue to make money, WGAS...

A palace revolution is needed, but the agencies aren't pushing it.

[Goya]

Precisely. I had an interview with CP a while back (about the time I decided never to use them ever again for anything) .

Out of interest, what are your particular gripes against CP? I signed my first contract with them a few months back & will probably not renew unless I can either get away from them or there's nothing else around.

It was a time when I was even less educated in the way of contracting than I am now! A mistake hopefully not to be repeated . . .

[malvolio]

They are commoditising the market, they refuse to treat me as a business. They pretend to their clients that they are the consultancy not me. They sell me as a temporary employee, which I am emphatically not. They do not let you out of their self-billing scheme. They appear to cheat the VAT element of expenses (I only tried that once, after that the bills went to the client). They think they are doing me the favour. They are pushing inside IR35 contracts on us becuase they've sold the clients on the idea that this will take them out of employee claims and tax investigations (post-Muscat it won't of course). Their contracts are horrible and over complex and try to make me liable for their risks. Their margins are stupidly high.

I think that's all. Avoid. Always...

[Goya]

They are commoditising the market, they refuse to treat me as a business. They pretend to their clients that they are the consultancy not me. They sell me as a temporary employee, which I am emphatically not. They do not let you out of their self-billing scheme. They appear to cheat the VAT element of expenses (I only tried that once, after that the bills went to the client). They think they are doing me the favour. They are pushing inside IR35 contracts on us becuase they've sold the clients on the idea that this will take them out of employee claims and tax investigations (post-Muscat it won't of course). Their contracts are horrible and over complex and try to make me liable for their risks. Their margins are stupidly high.

I think that's all. Avoid. Always...

Wise words indeed, thanks!