terms regarding 4 months after expiry of contract agreement

[dkldn]

My contract agreement (section listed below) with an agent has the following restriction for the first 4 months after termination or expiry of the contract. I don't feel it's reasonable for the 4 months restriction. Is it a standard practice or not?


8. Protection of AgencyXYZ’s Business

8.1. The Supplier shall not, and shall procure that the Consultant shall not, alone or jointly
with another or others in any capacity and whether or not for its or his benefit prior to
the expiry of four calendar months after the termination or expiry of this Agreement:

8.1.1. approach the Client for a permanent position or temporary engagement or enter into
a permanent position or temporary engagement with the Client (or similarly/likewise
with any member of the Client Group if any such permanent position or temporary
engagement was or could be gained as a result of the provision of Services in the
course of this Agreement);

8.1.2. enter into any arrangement whatsoever (other than via AgencyXYZ) to provide services
of the same or similar nature to the Services with the Client (or any member of the
Client Group if any such arrangement was or could be gained as a result of the
provision of Services in the course of this Agreement);

8.1.3. directly or indirectly induce (or seek to induce) to leave or cease performing
service(s) for any member of the AgencyXYZ Group or Client Group, any contractor or
employee of any member of the AgencyXYZ Group or Client Group with which or whom
the Supplier or Consultant had material contact in the course of its, his or their
supply of the Services at any time in the six months prior to such termination or
expiry;

8.2. The Supplier shall not, and shall procure that the Consultant shall not, alone or jointly
with another or others in any capacity and whether or not for its or his benefit at any
time use the name “AgencyXYZ” or “AgencyXYZ Associates” or any other business name used
at any time by any member of the AgencyXYZ Group or Client Group for the purposes of a
business similar to or competing with any business carried on by any member of the
AgencyXYZ Group or Client Group.

8.3. Having regard to the nature of the business carried out by the Client and any member
of the Client Group and to the legitimate business interests and goodwill of AgencyXYZ, the
parties accept that the scope and extent of the restrictions contained within Clause
8 are both reasonable and necessary to protect the legitimate business interests
and goodwill of AgencyXYZ.

[NotAllThere]

Seems reasonable to me. What's the problem? If you don't like something - start negotiating.

[lxt04]

If it's a 24 month contract, why wouldn't it be reasonable? What's reasonable and what's unenforceable depends upon the contract as a whole. If the role is only 3 months long it's another story. If you are concerned about it you should have the entire contract reviewed.

Note that if you haven't opted out of the relevant employment regs, most of that clause isn't enforceable (you're limited to an 8 week exclusivity period). Agents tend to avoid telling you this when encouraging you to opt-out. If you've already met the client before signing an opt-out the opt-out is invalid.

[dkldn]

It's 12 month contract. Maybe I misunderstood it. Initially I thought it meant that I can't get another job with the same client through other agency in the first 4 months after expiry of this contract.

[northernladuk]

Standard stuff I am afraid. Seen it in nearly every contract I have had in some shape or forum. One comforting fact is I have seen many people leave and come back with diff client or left perman and come back as contractor and this has never been enforced. Been some upset people but I have yet to see it actually affect anyone.

At the end of the day until someone pays a lawer and takes you to court it is just words on a piece of paper. There are ways around it through negotiation as well let alone the brute for approach

[TheFaQQer]

It's 12 month contract. Maybe I misunderstood it. Initially I thought it meant that I can't get another job with the same client through other agency in the first 4 months after expiry of this contract.

It does mean that. You can't go direct, or via another agency to the client or another company in the client's group of companies (if applicable), for four months after you end this contract (clause 8.1.1 and 8.1.2)

If you are opted in, then the restriction isn't valid, though.

[Wanderer]

Seems reasonable to me. What's the problem? If you don't like something - start negotiating.

I don't know if it's reasonable but that is what they try on all the time. I had a very similar clause in my contract and it was a real pain to negotiate away - and this was with an agency which didn't even introduce me to the client! In the end, I wondered why I bothered.

The thing to remember is that if you don't properly opt out of the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations then the most they can hold you to is 14 weeks from the start of the contract or 8 weeks from the end (which ever is the longer of the two).

Now does this mean that this section of the contract is invalid and they couldn't enforce it? Or does it mean that they can say "OK then, make it 8 weeks"?

I just sign contracts these days, it's such a lot of ball ache arguing the point with these muppets. If it comes to the crunch, I'd see them in court and argue the legality with a restraint of trade defence or if it's really bad, just pheonix the company and they can sue the defunct one.

[Grinder]

A while back I finished 9 months at a client. It was initially a 3 month contract, renewed for another 3 months, then 3 lots of 1 month renewal.

Each time the agency contract specified 12 month restriction against going direct by a number of devious means.

I very much doubt 12 months is enforceable on this basis.