Asked for commitment in very fluid situation

[dwater]

In Usenet days it was called top posting and very much frowned upon!

I miss usenet...all these alternatives (slack, web forums/etc) seem to have very little to add :/

[dwater]

Interesting thread...

I notice a lot of comments about the contract (and deciding whether or not to break it). Does it matter if your contract isn't with the client, but with an agency?

My first thought is that it might be worse, since you're (well, I would be) much more likely to get repeat business from an agent than from a client (it depends, though). I suppose it's true that you potentially upset two entities, rather than just one.

I can't see any arguments that would mean it is better if your contract is with an agent. Are there any?

I also wonder about the substitution argument - how easy is it to actually do that? If you are operating as a limited company, is it not possible to hire someone else, probably another contractor, to do the work for you? Is that sub-contracting?

[northernladuk]

What is this!!! Trolling in the pro forums?

Honestly. I wish you'd drop the tolling rubbish. You post more than enough off topic comments yourself so you shouldn't be calling everyone that replied to you trolling. Even the on topic stuff makes no sense most of the time. An off topic reply is hardly trolling either.

I'm sure you are already reporting everyone but if you don't like it report it and a mod will do the needful.

[northernladuk]

Interesting thread...

I notice a lot of comments about the contract (and deciding whether or not to break it). Does it matter if your contract isn't with the client, but with an agency?

If you have a contract and the terms have been breached then you have a problem whoever the contract is with. Outcomes can be different depending on who owns it though. Fairly complex question really.

My first thought is that it might be worse, since you're (well, I would be) much more likely to get repeat business from an agent than from a client (it depends, though). I suppose it's true that you potentially upset two entities, rather than just one.

Agent would sell their own grandmother's to make money. It certainly won't help if you are amongst a number of potential candidates for the next gig but if you are the one that will make them money they'll be your best friend again.

I can't see any arguments that would mean it is better if your contract is with an agent. Are there any?

It's complicated and it depends on the situation. Agents factor payments so payment terms will tend to be better through an agent as one example. In general the more people in a chain the more problems can occur.

I also wonder about the substitution argument - how easy is it to actually do that? If you are operating as a limited company, is it not possible to hire someone else, probably another contractor, to do the work for you? Is that sub-contracting?

It is. Sending someone in in your place if you want to leave is substitution. Both are extremely difficult to do as clients and agents rarely understand this and may not be too happy losing control so are more likely to refuse and go find someone themselves.