Agencies CAN refuse to use opt-in contractors

[malvolio]

They probably won't do that.

They will likely pay up the day before the court hearing as they have finally paid to talk to a solicitor.

Lots of businesses including agencies won't use a solicitor unless they have to thinking it saves them money.

I suggest our side wouldn't accept a settlement; there's no need to do so and the idea is to get a ruling. Plus, perhaps more importantly, get the guy's money.

But let's not get ahead of outrselves, it may not go anywhere.

[psychocandy]

ACtually I'm pushing something that may clarify. One of our number has been refused payment by the agency on the grounds that they haven't been paid, but as far as I can reasonably tell he is opted in by default. He needs to follow this through with EASI first but if that goes nowhere, or the opting status remains unclear, or he is opted in so making the agency wrong, I'll push to take it to court.

Lots of things can conspire to stop this happening of course, but if we don't try...

Be interested to hear results of this.

[psychocandy]

The whole opt out rules and regulations are complete bollacks.

Agencies don't like it so they try to blag it anyway. Even if this doesn't work they know they can be awkward if they really want to and never get pulled up for it.

For instance, agency says no we're not sending you're CV off unless you sign opt out first. You say no, so they don't send CV off and you don't get the gig.

You complain to EAS (who don't seem to understand the regulations anyway!). Agency denies all knowledge and says CV was not sent because you were not suitable not because of opt out. End of process, net result = no contract, agency continue to do this all the time.

Until someone like PCG gets their thumb out of their arse and tackles this, I fear this is what is going to happen in future. You're just going to have to hope you've got any agency that dont play this silly game.....

[tractor]

...

ACtually I'm pushing something that may clarify. One of our number has been refused payment by the agency on the grounds that they haven't been paid, but as far as I can reasonably tell he is opted in by default. He needs to follow this through with EASI first but if that goes nowhere, or the opting status remains unclear, or he is opted in so making the agency wrong, I'll push to take it to court.

Lots of things can conspire to stop this happening of course, but if we don't try...

Given the rise of another recent thread on the matter here, how did this situation pan out? Did contractor get their money? How far did the agent push? How far did IPSE (then PCG) push?

[malvolio]

Given the rise of another recent thread on the matter here, how did this situation pan out? Did contractor get there money? How far did the agent push? How far did IPSE (then PCG) push?

No idea. Why don't you ask them?

[tractor]

...

No idea. Why don't you ask them?

Because you raised it here and despite trying, I can find no reference over there. Additionally, you said "I'll push to take it to court" so I thought you may have the answer off the top of your head.

Why don't you answer? Oh I forgot, you don't do answers, do you?

Flounce if you want, it does you no favours though.

[TheFaQQer]

No idea. Why don't you ask them?

New thread created. I look forward to reading the answers

[SueEllen]

Given the rise of another recent thread on the matter here, how did this situation pan out? Did contractor get their money? How far did the agent push? How far did IPSE (then PCG) push?

To be fair when I had an issue with the opt-out malvolio was helpful but the PCG wasn't. I actually sorted out the issue myself with the EAI as I get a solicitor to review my contracts. In my case the agency eventually backed down but then proceeded to screw other contractors.

[TheFaQQer]

New thread created. I look forward to reading the answers

For anyone interested in this, the question was put to the IPSE management about this specific case, but answer came there none.

[malvolio]

For anyone interested in this, the question was put to the IPSE management about this specific case, but answer came there none.

Odd. I thought that was answered... Ho hum...