Hmmm! Short term contracting past is not seen as successful???

[Milkyway]

This is a bit worrying... I take it this is not the general thinking in the ClientCo or AgencyCo market about contractors!!!

I saw a role advertised today for a WPF Senior developer in Milton Keynes.
It asks for moon from the potential candidate and offers shameful low rate.

Anyway the thing that got me really worried is this bit where they talk about the key requirements of the contractor

"You must boast a successful contract past (not lots of short term assignments)".

Sounds really sad reading up these words in the role.
So having short term contracts in the past is not seen as a successful contractor???

In a sense it sounds insulting!
As a matter of fact, this role itself is advertised only for 3-6 months , and they think its ok for them to advertise short terms ones, and expect candidates to have long contract past!!!

[oliverson]

This is a bit worrying... I take it this is not the general thinking in the ClientCo or AgencyCo market about contractors!!!

I saw a role advertised today for a WPF Senior developer in Milton Keynes.
It asks for moon from the potential candidate and offers shameful low rate.

Anyway the thing that got me really worried is this bit where they talk about the key requirements of the contractor

"You must boast a successful contract past (not lots of short term assignments)".

Sounds really sad reading up these words in the role.
So having short term contracts in the past is not seen as a successful contractor???

In a sense it sounds insulting!
As a matter of fact, this role itself is advertised only for 3-6 months , and they think its ok for them to advertise short terms ones, and expect candidates to have long contract past!!!

Some 'decision makers' have that view and I think it's an idiotic one. They're obviously blinded into thinking that because somebody has 6 months on their profile they haven't been renewed. I'd say a long and continual history of shorter term contracts is an indication of a proper contractor whereas somebody who's been at the same place for 3+ years is really a disguised perm, possibly lacking in ambition and desire to move on and learn/improve. But actually I wouldn't draw any conclusions. I'd prefer to actually TALK TO the candidate, assuming they had the skills I wanted, to find out more about the contract history. I have a few 6 month stints on my profile and almost all of them have been short-term requirements and have been delivered. The others were where either they've cut my rate and I've not stayed/renewed, the project has been canned due to budget or a changed in strategy. Never judge a book by its cover.

[uk contractor]

IME with over 20 years banking contracting experience its 50/50 if short term contracts are helpful or not.

Some hiring managers view it as a good sign that the contractor is so marketable & likeable they keep getting new contracts.

Or

Some hiring managers think its a very bad sign that the contractor is unable to hold the roles down & or extend.

I think its about 50/50 but personally if they put too many clauses like that on the job-ad it tells me either:
1: They do not know what they want
2: Got letdown badly by a previous contractor
3: Whoever is hiring is inexperienced or limited by the budget

You get what you pay for!

[BrilloPad]

In general getting renewed once will be enough.

They don't want to see people who can interview well but then not put it into practice.

[northernladuk]

Not sure what the issue is really. You already said they want the earth so highly likely the advert isn't very well worded. What ever it says you have two options, apply or not. Daft wording like that makes absolutely no difference to anything.

[yasockie]

Tbh, a lot of IT contracts are 3-6 months initially, but the only thing you get to do in the first few months is the mandatory health and safety training. I've always found it quite rewarding to stay a bit longer, but not too long.
I think getting an extension is a good sign of you doing things right and then you can cancel or ask for a rate increase well in advance of the second extensions - this ticks a lot of good boxes: clients should understand that you now have specific experience that increases your value to the company, if they don't recognise that, time to get out, you stay under two years rule for expenses, your skillset doesn't get stale and you don't get entangled into internal politics

[unixman]

Getting renewals is probably the best proof of ability.

[oliverson]

Getting renewals is probably the best proof of ability.

Or sucking up, it could be either. I've worked with guys that get renewed because they stay late, get in early, do little when they're their but can brown nose the boss like you wouldn't believe, usually about something they have in common, like both having kids of a similar age, or a shared hobby, football team, you name it.

I'm not saying people don't get extended on merit but that's far from the only factor.

[BolshieBastard]

This is a bit worrying... I take it this is not the general thinking in the ClientCo or AgencyCo market about contractors!!!

I saw a role advertised today for a WPF Senior developer in Milton Keynes.
It asks for moon from the potential candidate and offers shameful low rate.

Anyway the thing that got me really worried is this bit where they talk about the key requirements of the contractor

"You must boast a successful contract past (not lots of short term assignments)".

Sounds really sad reading up these words in the role.
So having short term contracts in the past is not seen as a successful contractor???

In a sense it sounds insulting!
As a matter of fact, this role itself is advertised only for 3-6 months , and they think its ok for them to advertise short terms ones, and expect candidates to have long contract past!!!

How many times do I have to post this?! Clients want contractors but then treat or view them as permies!! Hence why they want people with cv's that show a long time with the same client.

Im sorry (well really im not) but anyone calling themselves a contractor who has done 4 or 5 continuous years at the same client isnt a contractor. They are a 'contractor' who has become 'part and parcel' of the client's organisation.

To me, its a red flag about the client if they state they want evidence of long contracts at the same client as its banged to rights they'll treat you as a permie once you're under their boot.

[Elliegirl]

I was speakng to a friend about just this topic recently.
Currently in a role where the go live date has moved from mid next year to end 2016, maybe even move into 2017.
I have no intention of going into 2017 (should they be kind enough to renew my contract in first quarter of 2016) as I think a year doing what I do is plenty long enough. My strategy has been to construct a dangerous looking CV by exposing myself to a number of environments, thus building the love between my CV and agencies so they will contact me with new and more lucrative opportunities. Contract lengths of between 6 months to 1 year have been enough to pursue this strategy successfully. And I get bored if I stay anywhere too long anyway.