Ajilon - "Employed Consultant"

[craig1]

A few weeks ago I was invited to become an "employed consultant" by one agency working as sole agency for a large company. Previously seen rates of around £350-£400 per day for project management roles based on my experience level in that company, instead they were advertising it as "employed consultants" on £50k.

All the insecurity of contract work, all the downfalls and reduced pay of permanent work. Agency makes far more profit, client gets a slight reduction in fees paid, contractor gets stiffed from both ends.

Out of sheer principle they were told to go forth and multiply.

[Pingu2]

I am an "employed consultant" with Spring, part of Adecco. I took the job because I needed to work. I wouldn't do it again. Their contract terms are deplorable, basically you have none of the security of being a permie with none of the benefits of being a contractor. There's no pay premium, but I'm still going to be out of contract end Jan and no way of building up a cushion. Also read their contract in detail before signing. I've got asymmetric notice periods in mine (in their favour of course) and the benefits don't kick in until they decide that your probation period has ended. Avoid if you can!!!!!!!!

[Another Agents View]

Ajilon - "Employed Consultant"

"Employed Consultant" - EC model has been taken on by a number of IT recruitment firms - Ajilion, Spring, Sanderson etc. Basically they recognised that the IT Services firms are putting in consultants to companies at cheaper costs to clients that a day rate contractor...
So look at it as working for these recruitment companies as a "permanent" IT Consultant, within their IT Services arm.

Pros :-
1/ Possible employment if you're struggling to get a role (Port in a storm)
2/ Some security - EC models doesn't normally get engaged unless the contract is for less than 6 months.

Cons :-
1/ Signnificantly less money than a day rate contractor, and without the ability to manage your own business.
2/ Job security reliant on the contract extending or the IT services company (IT Services company) finding you another assignment before you've been on the bench too long otherwise redundancy situation.
3/ I don't think IT services arms of recruitment firms are as mature as dedicated IT Services firms, so may not have the back up you might expect of working for Accenture / HP / IBM etc

In my experience the EC model competes internally with the Contractor recruitment consultants in the company, but some offer rewards / bonuses to the consultants for selling the solutions, but most aren't that experienced at selling it. Defo a favourite of the companies management as the margins are significantly higher!!

Hope this is helpful insight.

[Not So Wise]

Basically they recognised that the IT Services firms are putting in consultants to companies at cheaper costs to clients that a day rate contractor...

In 15 years never seen such a thing, the contractor/employee getting less that day rate contractor? Sure all the time, but the client paying less? Never. More common to see client paying 50% more and up (worst ever seen was a difference of 300% between what contractor/employee was getting and what client was paying)

Hell part of reason we got IR35 was because foreign IT service firms (mainly US based) paid a lot of money to politicians because they could not compete with day raters

[cojak]

not with a bargepole.

Or yours...

(the OP's that is Mordac...)

[BolshieBastard]

This has just happened to me this morning!!
An email from Adecco, telling me all contractors are going to be invited to become "Employed Consultants".

Not sure of the exact terms yet, but I'm sure they can't be good.

Im at a large international bank through adecco atm on a very important project. They better not try this with us. Havent heard anything to suggest they will either.

[2BIT]

the way i see these permanent consultant roles is the worst of both worlds- basically you have the same travel as you would as a contractor and likely project based work (which can mean long days) but you get a permie wage and have all the permie stuff to contend with, moreover you'll likely have to fill in weekly timesheets and expense claims too giving you that extra admin overhead and initial outlay to cover trains, planes and hotel rooms.

I guess it depends on how much they are offering as a salary and what the travel will be like.

[Another Agents View]

In 15 years never seen such a thing, the contractor/employee getting less that day rate contractor? Sure all the time, but the client paying less? Never. More common to see client paying 50% more and up (worst ever seen was a difference of 300% between what contractor/employee was getting and what client was paying)

Hell part of reason we got IR35 was because foreign IT service firms (mainly US based) paid a lot of money to politicians because they could not compete with day raters

Apologies bashed out that too quickly at end of a busy day. Meant to say IT Services companies putting consultants in at cheaper cost (TO Provider NOT TO Clientco) than day rate contractor.
So EC model allows to charge client less, percieved less flightrisk as consultant is employed..... whilst still allowing MUCH BIGGER margin for agency than using day rate contractors.

Makes a nonsense of the posts discussing what margin is fair for an agency to charge.

[SueEllen]

So EC model allows to charge client less, percieved less flightrisk as consultant is employed..... whilst still allowing MUCH BIGGER margin for agency than using day rate contractors.

Considering I know lots of people of different ages including those with young children and a mortgage who have walked out of various jobs within 2 months of starting the risk is very "perceived".

Unfortunately in the UK too many companies take the p*ss out of people with working hours.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I think this is just a pre-cursor to the introducton of the Agency Workers Directive at the end of next year. At that point anyone on a 12 week+ contract will have to benefit from full employment rights from the agency/client/umbrella

Agency Worker Directive and Regulations 2010 | Policies | BIS

Definitions of Agency Worker for the purposes of the legislation as follows:

The meaning of agency worker
3.—(1) In these Regulations “agency worker” means an individual who—

(a)is supplied by a temporary work agency to work temporarily for and under the supervision and direction of a hirer; and.
(b)has a contract with the temporary work agency which is—.
(i)a contract of employment with the agency, or.
(ii)any other contract to perform work and services personally for the agency..
(2) But an individual is not an agency worker if—

(a)the contract the individual has with the temporary work agency has the effect that the status of the agency is that of a client or customer of a profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual; or.
(b)there is a contract, by virtue of which the individual is available to work for the hirer, having the effect that the status of the hirer is that of a client or customer of a profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual..
(3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a) an individual shall be treated as having been supplied by a temporary work agency to work temporarily for and under the supervision and direction of a hirer if—

(a)the temporary work agency initiates or is involved as an intermediary in the making of the arrangements that lead to the individual being supplied to work temporarily for and under the supervision and direction of the hirer, and.
(b)the individual is supplied by an intermediary, or one of a number of intermediaries, to work temporarily for and under the supervision and direction of the hirer..
(4) An individual treated by virtue of paragraph (3) as having been supplied by a temporary work agency, shall be treated, for the purposes of paragraph (1)(b), as having a contract with the temporary work agency.

(5) An individual is not prevented from being an agency worker—

(a)because the temporary work agency supplies the individual through one or more intermediaries;.
(b)because one or more intermediaries supply that individual;.
(c)because the individual is supplied pursuant to any contract or other arrangement between the temporary work agency, one or more intermediaries and the hirer;.
(d)because the temporary work agency pays for the services of the individual through one or more intermediaries; or.
(e)because the individual is employed by or otherwise has a contract with one or more intermediaries..
(6) Paragraph (5) does not prejudice the generality of paragraphs (1) to (4).