Terminating Contract Early

[TheFaQQer]

Services to be performed by a substitute, and in any event for all Services performed on its behalf. Where the Consultancy’s charges are on a time and materials basis, or where any individual who will provide Services is named in a Schedule (or the Client has a reasonable expectation that the Services will primarily be provided by a specific individual), it is the Consultancy’s responsibility to ensure that the relevant skills and experience of any replacement personnel remain commensurate with the fee rates charged.
It is the Client’s responsibility to afford the Consultancy with such access, information and staff cooperation as the Consultancy may reasonably require for the proper performance of any Services, and for ensuring that all relevant Health and Safety policies, risks, information and relevant statutory compliance measures are disclosed to the Consultancy.

So it is your responsibility to ensure that the substitute has the skills and experience to match or exceed your own.

[northernladuk]

Services to be performed by a substitute, and in any event for all Services performed on its behalf. Where the Consultancy’s charges are on a time and materials basis, or where any individual who will provide Services is named in a Schedule (or the Client has a reasonable expectation that the Services will primarily be provided by a specific individual), it is the Consultancy’s responsibility to ensure that the relevant skills and experience of any replacement personnel remain commensurate with the fee rates charged.
It is the Client’s responsibility to afford the Consultancy with such access, information and staff cooperation as the Consultancy may reasonably require for the proper performance of any Services, and for ensuring that all relevant Health and Safety policies, risks, information and relevant statutory compliance measures are disclosed to the Consultancy.

And what does your contract say about the clients rights to refuse the sub? That's the hurdle you have.

[icemancomeths]

And what does your contract say about the clients rights to refuse the sub? That's the hurdle you have.

There is nothing about refusing a sub.

[northernladuk]

There is nothing about refusing a sub.

OK something about accepting a sub. There should be something about clients approval of your sub that would stop you putting any old sod in.

[icemancomeths]

OK something about accepting a sub. There should be something about clients approval of your sub that would stop you putting any old sod in.

The Consultancy is responsible for maintaining reasonable continuity in personnel providing Services on its behalf, but reserves the right in its sole discretion to make changes from time to time; no additional charge will be made for any handover period, and the Consultancy remains responsible for defining the scope of (and, if any supervision and direction is required, for providing such supervision and direction of) any Services to be performed by a substitute, and in any event for all Services performed on its behalf. Where the Consultancy’s charges are on a time and materials basis, or where any individual who will provide Services is named in a Schedule (or the Client has a reasonable expectation that the Services will primarily be provided by a specific
individual), it is the Consultancy’s responsibility to ensure that the relevant skills and experience of any replacement personnel remain commensurate with the fee rates charged.

[TheFaQQer]

There is nothing about refusing a sub.

So they have no right to refuse your offer.

[northernladuk]

So they have no right to refuse your offer.

It appears not. Someone has screwed up there. This looks like the type of clause a major outsourcer would have, not a one man band...

Good luck working for nothing doing the handover to your sub though.....

[TheFaQQer]

It appears not. Someone has screwed up there. This looks like the type of clause a major outsourcer would have, not a one man band...

Good luck working for nothing doing the handover to your sub though.....

And why shouldn't you do the handover for free? It's a sign of how a genuine business would act after all.

[northernladuk]

And why shouldn't you do the handover for free? It's a sign of how a genuine business would act after all.

Of course. I bet this hasn't occurred to the 'Send a sub in and bugger off immediately' brigade though.

[Taita]

When I did it, I had a friend who was available. He wasn't my employee, though, he contracted through his company to mine, and my company provided the services that we were contracted to deliver.

From April, I wouldn't subcontract. I would purchase a specific service from his company, though



I didn't interview anyone, and I didn't hire anyone. I brought in the professional services of another company to deliver the contract while my company was unable to do so. I had no qualms about doing it, and I would do it again.

It depends a little on what you do and what stage of the project lifecycle you are at - if I was writing technical documentation based on code that had already been delivered, I'd have no qualms about getting someone with better writing skills than myself to do that work for me, for example. If it was the start of the project and I was designing the solution that I would have to deliver, I'd be less likely to do it because I wouldn't want to have to build to someone else's design when I could be building to my own.

Legally and professionally, your company is liable to deliver to the same level that they already were - which is why you need to trust the person you are bringing in as a substitute.



The reason I denigrate those that aren't very good at their job is that they aren't very good at their job. I don't denigrate based on their nationality, however - but if I was bringing someone in then I would expect them to be able to do the job to the appropriate level. After all, my company is liable for their delivery, so why would I consider someone who couldn't do the job?



I agree.

Your manager (probably) reviewed a number of CVs and interviewed at least a couple of candidates before hiring you. Why should he accept your proposed substitute without satisfying himself that the person is right for the job?

It is not sufficient to offer someone in your place. The buyer's perception of a substitute is someone to replace a departing person seamlessly. Why should he put up with one iota of disruption or inconvenience just to suit your change in plans? What is in it for him?

Let's not get too carried away with our own rhetoric...... nobody really believes the right of substitution is anything other than an IR35 factor, do they? As far as I know such a right did not enter into any freelance contractual dealings prior to IR35.