contracting with another division of same client through a different agency

[raphal]

I recently finished my contract with a client. Now I am anticipating another contract through a different agency. The client of this contract (Indian company) has secured a deal with the client that I finished just now, but it is a different division and location. The handcuff terms with my last agency says

"Throughout the Assignment Term and for a period of 6 months afterwards the Service Provider will not and will
procure that the Personnel will not, other than with the written consent of the Company, provide services similar
to the Services or any information technology related services in any capacity either directly or indirectly to:
1 the Client;
2 to any of the Client’s subsidiary or associate companies in respect of which it provided Services during
the Assignment Term; and
3 to any Customer of the Client with whom the Service Provider has had direct dealings with (including in
the provision of Services) during the Assignment."

I believe there won't be a problem if an offer is made and accept it. Am I right ? My concern is with the term "indirectly" in the handcuff.

[stek]

I recently finished my contract with a client. Now I am anticipating another contract through a different agency. The client of this contract (Indian company) has secured a deal with the client that I finished just now, but it is a different division and location. The handcuff terms with my last agency says

"Throughout the Assignment Term and for a period of 6 months afterwards the Service Provider will not and will
procure that the Personnel will not, other than with the written consent of the Company, provide services similar
to the Services or any information technology related services in any capacity either directly or indirectly to:
1 the Client;
2 to any of the Client’s subsidiary or associate companies in respect of which it provided Services during
the Assignment Term; and
3 to any Customer of the Client with whom the Service Provider has had direct dealings with (including in
the provision of Services) during the Assignment."

I believe there won't be a problem if an offer is made and accept it. Am I right ? My concern is with the term "indirectly" in the handcuff.

I lost interest after 'Indian Company'.....

[raphal]

I lost interest after 'Indian Company'.....

What if I say rate is at least £400, negotiable upwards.

[stek]

What if I say rate is at least £400, negotiable upwards.

I lost interest after 'Indian Company'.....

[northernladuk]

Handcuffs have to be fair and reasonable and have to have a party demonstrating loss if the handcuff is not honoured. That begs the question does the original agency represent the role you are going for? Will they lose income if you go with the other agency. I suspect not so there shouldn't be am issue. You could say that handcuff is an anti poaching approach as well but they are rarely enforced unless sensitive intellectual property is involved. Only you will known that.

[raphal]

Handcuffs have to be fair and reasonable and have to have a party demonstrating loss if the handcuff is not honoured. That begs the question does the original agency represent the role you are going for? Will they lose income if you go with the other agency. I suspect not so there shouldn't be am issue. You could say that handcuff is an anti poaching approach as well but they are rarely enforced unless sensitive intellectual property is involved. Only you will known that.

No, I didn't see this role on their website, not on the job sites also. So will go for it if an offer is made.