Contracting risks...

[SueEllen]

No idea why it was pulled. I don't have the contact details for the end client unfortunately.

Any number of reasons it doesn't matter the contract now doesn't exist.

[LondonManc]

I also see this as a risk to the contracting injury. "This" being contractors jumping. You're meant to behave like a business, so stay and see the deliverables out that you were originally contracted to do. Contract positions will continue to disappear to offshore Wipro, TCS, etc while contractors continue to jump ship for better gigs. These roles will not reappear either in the short term - it's going to take a stronger case than we've seen with joe public not wanting offshore call centres to get the jobs back on to the contract market.

[SueEllen]

I also see this as a risk to the contracting injury. "This" being contractors jumping. You're meant to behave like a business, so stay and see the deliverables out that you were originally contracted to do. Contract positions will continue to disappear to offshore Wipro, TCS, etc while contractors continue to jump ship for better gigs. These roles will not reappear either in the short term - it's going to take a stronger case than we've seen with joe public not wanting offshore call centres to get the jobs back on to the contract market.

That's unfair and unrealistic.

There are good reasons why contractors jump ship, and if a client wants to outsource they will. It doesn't matter whether a client has just permanent staff or a mixture.

I had a client a couple of years ago who brought in a technical director who specialised in outsourcing. For some reason the organisation thought that it was their staff's fault that they couldn't deliver when in fact the organisation hadn't invested in technology for years. While some staff did SFA other staff were studying and paying for themselves to get qualifications to jump ship, and they were jumping ship.

I also worked for a couple of clients', one a medium enterprise and another a large one, who had brought things back onshore. They had found the outsourcers so bad in quality they found it cheaper to pay one onshore person to do something than 10 offshore people.

[psychocandy]

But he stuck to the terms of the contract (which had a notice period built into it).

Sometime clients terminate contracts early (also in accordance with the contract). Also the many clients who impose rate cuts mid-contract, and who kill the contract early (but within the terms of the contract) if the contractor does not agree to the lower rate (this happened to me a few years ago).

EXACTLY. Here we go again - bend over and take, not allowed to invoke a legal clause in contract. Clients - if you don't want to don't agree to a contract with it in FFS!!!!!

Jeez. It never ceases to amaze me. You guys say "what does your contract say". In this case, I assume it says he can leave with 2 weeks notice so he does. whats the problem here?

OP - Bummercity, Illinois is where you're at. Either A) Get another gig sharpish or B) Beg last client to take you back!

[psychocandy]

I also see this as a risk to the contracting injury. "This" being contractors jumping. You're meant to behave like a business, so stay and see the deliverables out that you were originally contracted to do. Contract positions will continue to disappear to offshore Wipro, TCS, etc while contractors continue to jump ship for better gigs. These roles will not reappear either in the short term - it's going to take a stronger case than we've seen with joe public not wanting offshore call centres to get the jobs back on to the contract market.

Crap. Then why did client agree to notice period?

If you employ a plumber to install a bathroom for you but then he gets you to sign a contract saying he can do half the work for half the money if he sees fit but then leave the rest if he gives you notice then you've a choice.

A). Get a different plumber.
B). Say no and negotiate to get this taken out.
C). Sign it as it is, cross your fingers knowing full well what might happen, then bleat about it when it does.

Option (C) seems to be what a lot of client seem to think is acceptable. Then for some reason, people on here seem to think its morally wrong that this has happened.

Recent years I've done both types. One where the notice period was a week but manager knew full well if they didn't put that in they'd get no-one (because the rate was crap). So he had no choice.

Current gig is three months at a time with no termination by me. Client insisted on this. Up to me then to agree or not.

Point being both parties agree to these terms at the beginning - its a contract.

[northernladuk]

I'll bet there are many more contractors giving notice just to get a little bit extra for himself than there are clients that use it because they have a genuine business reason the contract can no longer continue. That's the difference. We abuse the notice period much more than clients do. Contractors jump much more often for much less and the reasons are rarely driven by business need, more out of greed. Clients don't take on contractors in the knowledge they will pull the notice but many contractors do.

Clients have notice periods in place as they expect you to honour the contract on the same terms as they do. They will only invoke notice when money runs out, work is finished or the contractor is crap. It's not unreasonable for them to expect the same in return. Invoking for £20 a day more or a bit closer to home just isn't the same. That is where the unprofessionalism of the contractor comes out. He's mercenary and isn't being driven by business which the clients are...

Yes there are many nuances around this like the banks invoking it across the board but on the whole I reckon it's us that are more the problem than the clients. Just because there is a notice period in it does not mean you can use it willy nilly as you fancy to get another gig...

Can you? Yes.. Is it professional? No it is not.

In the comments the posters have made on this thread they are not saying he shouldn't, they are just saying it's karma it's gone tits up. Nothing wrong with that.

[LondonManc]

Crap. Then why did client agree to notice period?

If you employ a plumber to install a bathroom for you but then he gets you to sign a contract saying he can do half the work for half the money if he sees fit but then leave the rest if he gives you notice then you've a choice.

A). Get a different plumber.
B). Say no and negotiate to get this taken out.
C). Sign it as it is, cross your fingers knowing full well what might happen, then bleat about it when it does.

Option (C) seems to be what a lot of client seem to think is acceptable. Then for some reason, people on here seem to think its morally wrong that this has happened.

Recent years I've done both types. One where the notice period was a week but manager knew full well if they didn't put that in they'd get no-one (because the rate was crap). So he had no choice.

Current gig is three months at a time with no termination by me. Client insisted on this. Up to me then to agree or not.

Point being both parties agree to these terms at the beginning - its a contract.

Ah, the absolutely useless plumber analogy.

If a builder is constructing your new extension and signs up to do the lot but leaves before he puts the roof on to go to a better paid gig, you'd be calling him all sorts of names.

Point being, reputation. He won't get a building gig in your area again if people know he jumps ship before completing the job. It's unprofessional.

That's unfair and unrealistic.

There are good reasons why contractors jump ship, and if a client wants to outsource they will. It doesn't matter whether a client has just permanent staff or a mixture.

I had a client a couple of years ago who brought in a technical director who specialised in outsourcing. For some reason the organisation thought that it was their staff's fault that they couldn't deliver when in fact the organisation hadn't invested in technology for years. While some staff did SFA other staff were studying and paying for themselves to get qualifications to jump ship, and they were jumping ship.

I also worked for a couple of clients', one a medium enterprise and another a large one, who had brought things back onshore. They had found the outsourcers so bad in quality they found it cheaper to pay one onshore person to do something than 10 offshore people.

There are of course exceptional reasons (illness to self or nearest and dearest, severe homesickness, etc.) but to take a gig knowing full well that you'd jump ship for a better one (unless you're at rock bottom, zero warchest, etc.) is, imo, unprofessional.

I've seen outsourcing in a company and your final paragraph proved the point about what I was saying, so not sure on your point.

[fool]

I'll bet there are many more contractors giving notice just to get a little bit extra for himself than there are clients that use it because they have a genuine business reason the contract can no longer continue. That's the difference. We abuse the notice period much more than clients do. Contractors jump much more often for much less and the reasons are rarely driven by business need, more out of greed. Clients don't take on contractors in the knowledge they will pull the notice but many contractors do.

Clients have notice periods in place as they expect you to honour the contract on the same terms as they do. They will only invoke notice when money runs out, work is finished or the contractor is crap. It's not unreasonable for them to expect the same in return. Invoking for £20 a day more or a bit closer to home just isn't the same. That is where the unprofessionalism of the contractor comes out. He's mercenary and isn't being driven by business which the clients are...

Yes there are many nuances around this like the banks invoking it across the board but on the whole I reckon it's us that are more the problem than the clients. Just because there is a notice period in it does not mean you can use it willy nilly as you fancy to get another gig...

Can you? Yes.. Is it professional? No it is not.

In the comments the posters have made on this thread they are not saying he shouldn't, they are just saying it's karma it's gone tits up. Nothing wrong with that.

I had a contract where they hired two of us and two weeks later let the other guy go. I actually think they might have did it so they could pick a winner. Point being, people are people, and they'll be tulips on either side.

[northernladuk]

I had a contract where they hired two of us and two weeks later let the other guy go. I actually think they might have did it so they could pick a winner. Point being, people are people, and they'll be tulips on either side.

I'd like to see Psychocandys posts if this became as common as contractors bailing for 20 quid more.

[SussexSeagull]

I had a contract where they hired two of us and two weeks later let the other guy go. I actually think they might have did it so they could pick a winner. Point being, people are people, and they'll be tulips on either side.

I have had a couple of contracts where the done thing was to give month extensions then serve a week's notice when the work slowed.