State of the Market

[barely_pointless]

When you add in the agent fees, 600 a day ends up being close to 15K per month.

Some clients will always think they can hire 2 or 3 permies for that much.

And its true if they look further a field, my last three roles have had permies from Greece/Spain/Eastern europe and Mexico on the team.

I think Brexit has shrunk the EU resource pool somewhat, I was seeing quite a few Spanish - Polish etc, now not so much

[SussexSeagull]

Oddly the longest I went without a contract was following my longest ever contract which lasted nearly two and a half years. With hindsight - plus Brexit happened - I had a not very exciting contract at the top of my CV and agents didn't get past it.

Some clients like that you can come in for three to nine months to take a project over the line so there are no hard and fast rules about these things.

[northernladuk]

I get that people don't just go in for the money, but the amount of people on this thread who say "I've been back to back, no breaks for 10+ yrs" tells me, that majority don't really take huge breaks, besides that seems to be impossible nowadays anyway (perhaps back in the good ol' days you could take 3months off and land a contract straight away in less than a week). Also people don't seem to switch that often, unless tulip is really bad and market is super hot.

Nope, I know very few contractors that used the flexibility to have much time off. I've met a lot that have wound down, finished early or have expensive hobbies in their later years though. So very few people taking breaks but plenty working a pot up enjoying it later.

Even in the good old days a break in your contract was a bit of a hump to get over. Plenty of threads even back then about how to hide gaps and why don't recruiters understand them but nothing like the problem it is now.

Dunno about the switching bit. I've seen plenty of contractors with a history of 6 months or less gigs and met others that have been 5 years plus with the same client. I don't see any change in that nowadays. It's only the tax regieme and the market that's changed the size of the projects and length of time to deliver them hasn't been impacted.

Some very wild assumptions in that paragraph.

[dsc]

Are inside contractors really paid all that much more than perm staff? They are paid more for sure but nothing that screams jackpot. As per my experience at least as a generalist PM contractor.

The last few inside roles I did for day rates in the region of 550-600, the equivalent on permie grades was around 60-65k (in the PS) and 70-80k (plus a small annual bonus) in an FS firm. Overall, and especially from the pov of cost to the client/employer , it’s not a huge lot more is it considering holidays, employer NI, pension contributions, long notice period, sick leave, etc etc.

Maybe I’m in the minority, but I didn’t pivot to becoming a contractor just for the money. It was equally to do with flexibility and balance of power. Being able to avoid office politics, tell dickhead clients to FO if I wished to, being able to move on from toxic workplaces seamlessly, take summers off if I wished to, etc.

Not sure about inside, but lets not forget inside is rather a "new" thing, before reforms, everyone was outside earning tons more than permies. Even now with inside, if you pop £600 as your day rate, apparently the equivalent in permie land would be around 110k yearly, so effectively almost double the rates you quoted for PS.

I get that people don't just go in for the money, but the amount of people on this thread who say "I've been back to back, no breaks for 10+ yrs" tells me, that majority don't really take huge breaks, besides that seems to be impossible nowadays anyway (perhaps back in the good ol' days you could take 3months off and land a contract straight away in less than a week). Also people don't seem to switch that often, unless tulip is really bad and market is super hot.

[Fraidycat]

The last few inside roles I did for day rates in the region of 550-600

When you add in the agent fees, 600 a day ends up being close to 15K per month.

Some clients will always think they can hire 2 or 3 permies for that much.

And its true if they look further a field, my last three roles have had permies from Greece/Spain/Eastern europe and Mexico on the team.

[sreed]

The money the contractor is on and that's why there's such a huge interest in becoming a "contractor", most people see it as steady income which is 2-3 times what you get as a perm. Very often even the work is the same, so why be the "dumb" one and go perm?

The reality now with majority of contracts being inside is actually how it should be imho, outside shouldn't be the norm, especially not with how clients treat (or want to treat) contractors ie. as employees effectively.

As for training costs / upskilling - this is the new norm for perm anyway, no one wants to pay for training people hence trying to find someone with the most amount of skills, so that they can just work straight away. If perm people can do this as well, why take on an inside "contractor" and pay them more? (note that it's probably different with contractors who work directly with clients and they have an on-going relationship, the client knows damn well the contractor can deliver, so they are OK with paying a premium price as they know work will get delivered properly).

Are inside contractors really paid all that much more than perm staff? They are paid more for sure but nothing that screams jackpot. As per my experience at least as a generalist PM contractor.

The last few inside roles I did for day rates in the region of 550-600, the equivalent on permie grades was around 60-65k (in the PS) and 70-80k (plus a small annual bonus) in an FS firm. Overall, and especially from the pov of cost to the client/employer , it’s not a huge lot more is it considering holidays, employer NI, pension contributions, long notice period, sick leave, etc etc.

Maybe I’m in the minority, but I didn’t pivot to becoming a contractor just for the money. It was equally to do with flexibility and balance of power. Being able to avoid office politics, tell dickhead clients to FO if I wished to, being able to move on from toxic workplaces seamlessly, take summers off if I wished to, etc.

[ResistanceFighter]

You should have quite a decent warchest then?

qh

Yes, which is why I said no to the low ball offer, but unfortunately I'm not liquid enough to last with no work forever

[quackhandle]

What a dramatic change from being back to back with no gaps for the 10+ years previous.

You should have quite a decent warchest then?

qh

[pjt]

Getting to the end of April, and been looking since end of November last year.

had only a handful of calls, 2 interviews, 1 turned into an offer but I turned it down as the rate was just insulting.

What a dramatic change from being back to back with no gaps for the 10+ years previous.

Things need to change though right? The work itself didn't just fall off a cliff, it will need doing eventually

Very similar story to mine! Been out since January and applied for a lot of roles. So far I've had 3 interviews and pretty much nothing else. In the past my hit rate for interviews was over 50% but for some reason thats not working this time. First time I've not had back to back contracts in 16 years. Keep telling myself its the market but at the back of my mind I'm thinking is this it for me longer term!

[dsc]

It's the way of a contractor, otherwise what is the difference between you and the employee sitting at the desk beside you?
[...]

The money the contractor is on and that's why there's such a huge interest in becoming a "contractor", most people see it as steady income which is 2-3 times what you get as a perm. Very often even the work is the same, so why be the "dumb" one and go perm?

The reality now with majority of contracts being inside is actually how it should be imho, outside shouldn't be the norm, especially not with how clients treat (or want to treat) contractors ie. as employees effectively.

As for training costs / upskilling - this is the new norm for perm anyway, no one wants to pay for training people hence trying to find someone with the most amount of skills, so that they can just work straight away. If perm people can do this as well, why take on an inside "contractor" and pay them more? (note that it's probably different with contractors who work directly with clients and they have an on-going relationship, the client knows damn well the contractor can deliver, so they are OK with paying a premium price as they know work will get delivered properly).