Contractor v Client Notice Periods

[psychocandy]

I'm currently negotiating my extension based on this point. It's currently weighted 4 weeks to 1 in the clients favour and I've asked for that to be reduced by 50% before I will sign it.

For those stating notice periods are for permies can I ask how you go about terminating it early and breaking your contract without causing issues?

In my role I'm assuming the notice period is there for me to provide ample handover. I can't see them wanting to finish it earlier just because the contractor asked them to..

In my experience though, if you try this it starts alarm bells ringing for the client. They are bound to ask - why do you want this? Are you planning to bail early?

And like I said, for some clients, its come from higher up, no notice periods for contractors. Slightly inconvenient maybe but for 3 months at a time not a biggie. Just one of those things - if its a big deal for you dont sign up.

[LondonManc]

In my experience though, if you try this it starts alarm bells ringing for the client. They are bound to ask - why do you want this? Are you planning to bail early?

And like I said, for some clients, its come from higher up, no notice periods for contractors. Slightly inconvenient maybe but for 3 months at a time not a biggie. Just one of those things - if its a big deal for you dont sign up.

It's not always that clear cut though. If you get stiffed with a significant rate cut but have nothing initially to jump to, what should you do? It's meant to be a business to business relationship with the limited company contractors and the client isn't behaving very nicely.

[mdw]

In the examples you state above I would suggest that the misrepresentation in of a role constitutes a breach of contract and would be discussing with the client/agency on that basis, irrespective of notice clauses. If you're not doing the work you were brought in to do then in reality there can be no contract. However, this assumes that the contract contains a decent description of services/technologies used in the contract.

I've never seen a contract that includes the actual technologies to be used. The closest is usually something like 'Software Development', 'Systems Development', etc. which are open to vague interpretation. In my case, I just did the best job possible and kept the client onside, when I was offered an extension I raised it and got a rate increase to compensate. But always worth having a notice clause as a back up.

[northernladuk]

I've never seen a contract that includes the actual technologies to be used. The closest is usually something like 'Software Development', 'Systems Development', etc. which are open to vague interpretation. In my case, I just did the best job possible and kept the client onside, when I was offered an extension I raised it and got a rate increase to compensate. But always worth having a notice clause as a back up.

You need to be careful you are not working to job descriptions then. As a contractor you should have a very detail schedule of work covering the deliverables for that period. That way you can evidence you are on a short term assignment. Have a spec titled Developer with a remit to develop stuff as required is a job description not a contact of service.

You have to take this seriously... It was a key point that cost JLJ's owners dear in the their partial IR35 loss.

http://www.contractoruk.com/news/001...ir35_case.html

Another Control issue - whether Mr Spencer's work was subject to a 'quality control' process, did not prove to be a determining factor, partly owing to conflicting evidence from the worker and the client.

"Understandable" sympathised the judge but still, "nobody in the company [Allianz] would have had the detailed knowledge of Mr Spencer's field of expertise to judge whether in every respect he was tackling his projects in the best way."

Such a lack of control is "fine" when the worker is providing expert services (judgement point 23) - on a unique project (point 42), but not, explains Ms Cottrell, when "the engager needs work undertaken repeatedly, and when you are working generally within the organisation."

Given that the classic tests of employment status have not changed, and therefore remain as significantly determining as they were before the case, the advisor believes such a work pattern is the "main" warning contractors should heed.

Mr Mason agreed: "For a contractor, the central message being sent by the courts is that if you're going to engage over a long period, then you really need to be able to show that you're engaged on specific projects.

"[To be outside IR35 you can't] just basically get on with whatever work crops up [from the end-user]. Do that and you risk ending up becoming very much part and parcel of their organisation.

[ShandyDrinker]

You need to be careful you are not working to job descriptions then. As a contractor you should have a very detail schedule of work covering the deliverables for that period. That way you can evidence you are on a short term assignment. Have a spec titled Developer with a remit to develop stuff as required is a job description not a contact of service.

You have to take this seriously... It was a key point that cost JLJ's owners dear in the their partial IR35 loss.

IT contractor JLJ in first ever 'split IR35 case' :: Contractor UK

Spot on.

I've never seen a contract that includes the actual technologies to be used. The closest is usually something like 'Software Development', 'Systems Development', etc. which are open to vague interpretation. In my case, I just did the best job possible and kept the client onside, when I was offered an extension I raised it and got a rate increase to compensate. But always worth having a notice clause as a back up.

Even if it's just a change to something like {Technology/Technologies} Software Development Consultancy for {XYZ} Project it is an improvement. Detailing a list of deliverables is even better as it points to a well defined project.

In software development one of the biggest issues I see with both end clients and agencies is that generally they love contractors who have worked on BAU projects with many renewals, most probably on a rolling contract basis rather than contractors who are able to successfully deliver projects in a 3/6/9/12 month timeframe and then move onto something else. The interpretation of multiple projects for different clients over a short period is somehow seen as a negative as the inference appears to be that someone is rubbish rather than they could just be very good at what they do and deliver on time.

[SueEllen]

I've never seen a contract that includes the actual technologies to be used. The closest is usually something like 'Software Development', 'Systems Development', etc. which are open to vague interpretation. In my case, I just did the best job possible and kept the client onside, when I was offered an extension I raised it and got a rate increase to compensate. But always worth having a notice clause as a back up.

It's up to you to question the contract as agents rarely understand what exactly they are recruiting for.

When you meet the client find out what the scope of the work is, then get a contact number or a business card of one of the people who interviews you.

When the agent gives you a contract with an unspecified schedule, alter it with what you think should be the schedule of work in the contract and pass it on to your reviewer.

If the agent pushes back on the schedule - they are unlikely to if you have the contract reviewed - tell them you will talk to the client to confirm that's the project scope is and immediately do.