First job, first contract, a bit confused...

[northernladuk]

I will bet you they won't accept a Confirmation of Arrangements letter either....

The agent I had this fight with was a member of REC

[Wanderer]

The agent I had this fight with was a member of REC

Did they put their opt out demands in writing?
Do you fancy picking a fight with them by reporting them to the PCG (see this link for information about reporting it) and the REC then let the two fight it out and see what happens?

I don't blame you if you would rather have a quiet life than stir up tulip with them though...

[psychocandy]

But like NLUK its all well and good being right but having an extended legal argument doesnt get you the gig at the end of the day.

[Taurig]

OK, having had dozens of conversations today I have arranged this:

- I am going with an umbrella company and the whole Ltd company thing has been scrapped. This should sort out some of the issues I had with having to have insurance for 3 years after the contract, which I think was down to it being a Ltd company contract.

- I am going to opt out, but I have asked them to modify the contract so that they don't have a hold on me for 12 months after the contract terminates (I think the clause had 'solicitation' in there somewhere).

I really don't want to have to bail on this job, and much as I would have like to have stayed opted in, I think this is a reasonable compromise. Thoughts?

[formant]

- I am going to opt out, but I have asked them to modify the contract so that they don't have a hold on me for 12 months after the contract terminates (I think the clause had 'solicitation' in there somewhere).

I really don't want to have to bail on this job, and much as I would have like to have stayed opted in, I think this is a reasonable compromise. Thoughts?

Rest assured that your opt-out isn't actually valid if it's done after you've been introduced to the client. (Read bottom of this: Opt in, opt out? What the employment agency regulations are all about :: Contractor UK)

So should there be any issues - chances are you're de facto opted-in despite signing the opt-out.

[northernladuk]

Did they put their opt out demands in writing?
Do you fancy picking a fight with them by reporting them to the PCG (see this link for information about reporting it) and the REC then let the two fight it out and see what happens?

I don't blame you if you would rather have a quiet life than stir up tulip with them though...

Nope, they just a contract for 'opted out' contractors so had a load of discussions with their legal team as the agent didn't have a clue. They referred back to the PCG, REC and QDOS which all suggest opt out. Client was happy with Opted Out contractors (asked him in interview) so I gave up.

To be fair my head is mashed with all this. Even that PCG page suggests to Opt out as did QDOS so I really don't see the problem now and if I get another contract I will speak to them about in/out but I aint gonna fight to the hilt for it. A) It's pointless as the agents just fall back on their bodies advice and one contractor won't change that and B) It just isn't worth falling out with an agent or losing a gig over IMO.

No one really knows, no one gives a tulip and the situation very rarely happens and if it does it never goes legal anyway so it doesn't help. Fighting with an agent is not the way to get this fixed IMO.

Would much rather trick the agents in to a 12 month handcuff that isn't enforceable and then fight them when time comes. Remember that a handcuff has to demonstrate loss of business to the agent so it isn't even valid in a majority of cases.

[northernladuk]

OK, having had dozens of conversations today I have arranged this:

- I am going with an umbrella company and the whole Ltd company thing has been scrapped. This should sort out some of the issues I had with having to have insurance for 3 years after the contract, which I think was down to it being a Ltd company contract.

- I am going to opt out, but I have asked them to modify the contract so that they don't have a hold on me for 12 months after the contract terminates (I think the clause had 'solicitation' in there somewhere).

I really don't want to have to bail on this job, and much as I would have like to have stayed opted in, I think this is a reasonable compromise. Thoughts?

It's a contract NOT a job.....

Don't make them change the handcuff. It is unenforceable as it is. Why make them change it to something that is enforceable???

[Taurig]

It's a contract NOT a job.....

Don't make them change the handcuff. It is unenforceable as it is. Why make them change it to something that is enforceable???

They haven't changed it to anything, they've just taken that entire section out. I hope you're not about to tell me that is a huge mistake. Not signed it yet, but probably soon.

[northernladuk]

They haven't changed it to anything, they've just taken that entire section out. I hope you're not about to tell me that is a huge mistake. Not signed it yet, but probably soon.

Not a mistake, just one of those things. There is a lot of discussion about handcuff clauses on here which you can have a look at here...

handcuff site:forums.contractoruk.com/accounting-legal/ - Google Search

My take on it nowadays is to stuff the opt in/out rubbish and deal with it when the time comes. Incognito makes a point that I would fall back on in this post...

http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...lations-2.html

It was also mentioned, but I can't find the post, that this restriction can only be applied to protect the agent from loss. If you find a gig that the agent has no way of getting and is not losing any business over he can't enforce it. Again if the contract comes to an end and the client decides to change agent, the old agent hasn't got a leg to stand on because the client binned them and again they would never have have been able to fill the gig so can't fall back on the handcuff. They can cause a fuss, don't get me wrong, but legally they don't have a leg to stand on.

Thing to remember in all this is that so far, I have never seen anything go legal on here. Contracts, opt in/out, handcuffs, agent refusing to pay or anything. Get enough big guns on your side and fight and they will roll over. Biggest cojones wins regardless of the legal stand point. The best way out is to negotiate and then make threats to take legal. That seems to resolve 99% of situations. Doesn't really matter what the opt in or out or contract says. It is just ink on a piece of paper until legal people get involved... which costs a lot of time and money.

[northernladuk]

Hang on, they removed the handcuff section altogether? Lock stock and barrel? Could be a win that one then but very surprising. Don't worry about it.