Ltdco - Notice period imbalance (outside IR35)

[CalmEddie]

Public sector end client very keen on contractor candidate (my partner) and she was offered the role on a cursory interview.
The agency have been really slow and dragging their feet on almost every element of the end-client's urgent start.

Just inconvenience but shows they're not that sharp.

Latest problem is on a six-month gig, the contract between agent and ltdco has an imbalance of notice. agent can give 1 week, ltdco has to give 8 weeks.
Is this a new norm post-covid or are they taking the p***?

It's been queried, agent's low level admins keep saying it's standard, so being escalated, but I wondered what the group's experience is with this?

[northernladuk]

Nothing wrong with different notice periods. In fact it could be argued it's slightly better than a normal one but not quite as good as zero days notice for IR35. That said if shes inside then you can forget all that.

As for the 8 weeks. Yes that's a piss take. I've never seen one that long. Four weeks maybe but eight is pushing it. If she is outside IR35 then eight weeks isn't good at all but it is offset as a flag by the differening notice.

Again if she's inside the IR35 issue is irrelevant and the notice is a piss take. Sounds like the agent trying to protect their revenue stream so they can hold on to her while they find a replacement and not lose any billing. I can't see any client wanting eight weeks from a contractor. If the contractor wants to leave they won't want someone tied to them who doesn't want to be there.

If she's been offered the gig then she's got the position power. The agency are going to lose money going to get a candidate the client doesn't really want so I'd push back hard on that.

P.S. Urgent starts at a PS that take ages to complete is pretty common and from my experience is the client not the agent.

[CalmEddie]

Thanks Northernlad. The 8 weeks seemed excessive, but she went ahead with it anyway.

The contract received was very well prepared in terms of supporting an outside IR35 position. Came with a separate SoW detailing the services to be provided.
Took a little back and forth to get it all signed off. Was looking OK, but,....

As soon as the ink was dry, they sent a completely different SoW and a new contract, requiring different work from that agreed and interviewed for. Making for a role that would command 40-50% more in day rate, but of couse, at the originally offered rate with no increase.

Couldn't say if it was sharp practice or incompetence, but not on. She binned them.

[northernladuk]

Remember going forward the contract doesn't make much difference to the IR35 status. It's now down to the client to decide and she must get an SDS signed before she starts. Plenty of people started and been moved inside before the first invoice/payment cycle.

[Lance]

Remember going forward the contract doesn't make much difference to the IR35 status. It's now down to the client to decide and she must get an SDS signed before she starts. Plenty of people started and been moved inside before the first invoice/payment cycle.

Is this true or merely speculation?
We've seen one at most on these boards that I'm aware of.

It is a risk, but is it commonplace?

[eek]

Is this true or merely speculation?
We've seen one at most on these boards that I'm aware of.

It is a risk, but is it commonplace?

We've seen more than 1 - how common it really is - well nobody knows...

[northernladuk]

We've seen more than 1 - how common it really is - well nobody knows...

Indeed. I seem to think we've had around 3 posts on it now and most contractors don't know about CUK so some how stumble on. Bear in mind if it's happened to one contractor it's likely to have happened to others at that client. Three clients we've seen on here (assuming they are different) it could be double figures. Next to nothing in the greater scheme I guess but could be a trend worth keeping an eye on.