How do you handle disgruntled permanent staff and management

[missinggreenfields]

It's all about risk mitigation. If you go through an MSC, they take the risk on a client's behalf. It's how much due diligence a client wants to take before letting you on site that is the key - essentially, it's down to someone to prove that they have proved beyond reasonable doubt that you'll be eligible to work there and are through a legitimate payment vehicle (umbrella, ltd co, etc.)

For contractors, it's different to perms and they have certain rights and there are repercussions for bad references around the dismissal circumstances.

I'm aware of all that - I dispute that it's a legal requirement for agents to get references for ALL clients, though.

[SueEllen]

References are legality agencies are required to take up on ALL of their clients behalf. You can present those who most represent the role you are applying for, as they are only to show due diligence that you are competent to do that role.

Some agents don't take references from contractors.

Either because there is no requirement from the client or in rare cases the client will take them up directly.

Even when agencies have asked me for references it is a screening company that tends to do it not the actual agent themselves and these roles tend to be in finance and PS. Plus the references don't tend to be old clients as they take too long to collect they have been happy with other agents, my accountant and various other people who they can verify who they are on some public register.

[NigelJK]

Thought it was in the regulations (pg 24)

I didn't dig too deep, but when the reg's came in it exposed a number of agencies for whom this became too laborious. Note that the references part does not apply if you opt out.

Regulation 22 – Additional requirements where professional
qualifications are required or where work-seekers are to work with
vulnerable persons
Regulation 22(1) and (2) provides that before an agency or employment
business supplies or introduces a work-seeker to a hirer, it must ensure
that:
(a) where that work-seeker is required by law or any
professional body to have qualifications or authorisation to
work in the position in question; and
(b&c) where the work-seeker will be taking up a position which
involves working with or caring for any person(s) under the
age of eighteen, the elderly, infirm or anyone in need of
care and attention;
in addition to having satisfied the requirements in regulations 18 – 21, the
agency or employment business has, in accordance with regulation
22(2), also obtained:
22
(a) copies of any relevant qualifications or authorisations that
the work-seeker needs to work in the position in question
and offered copies of these to the hirer;
(b) two references from persons not related to the work-seeker,
where those persons have agreed that the agency or
employment business can disclose their references to the
hirer, and it has offered to provide copies of the references
in question to the hirer; and
(c) confirmation that the work-seeker is not unsuitable to work
with vulnerable persons. The agency or employment
business is obliged to take reasonably practicable steps to
obtain such confirmation.
Under regulation 22(3), if it has not been possible to comply fully or at all
with the above requirements despite having taken all reasonably
practicable steps to do so, the agency or employment business must
then inform the hirer that it has not been able to comply fully. The
agency or employment business must then inform the hirer of the steps it
has taken in order to comply.
Note: Agencies or employment businesses which arrange for the
employment of nannies or child care within the family home should refer
to any guidance issued by the Department for Education and Skills
relating to child care within the home.
The provisions of regulation 22 extend to limited company contractors
and those persons supplied through limited company contractors by
virtue of regulation 32(7) unless the limited company contractor and the
person to be supplied have given notice to opt-out of the Regulations.
It should be noted that the ability of limited liability contractors to opt out
of the provisions of the Regulations provided under regulation 32(9) does
not apply where the limited liability contractor, or the worker to be
supplied by them, is required to work with vulnerable persons - regulation
32(12).

[missinggreenfields]

Thought it was in the regulations (pg 24)

I didn't dig too deep, but when the reg's came in it exposed a number of agencies for whom this became too laborious. Note that the references part does not apply if you opt out.

So not quite "required to take up on ALL of their clients behalf" then

[LondonManc]

So not quite "required to take up on ALL of their clients behalf" then

If Nigel had actually read the first part of what he had cut and pasted, he would have seen that this section applies to:

(a) work-seeker (who) is required by law or any
professional body to have qualifications or authorisation to
work in the position in question; and
(b&c) where the work-seeker will be taking up a position which
involves working with or caring for any person(s) under the
age of eighteen, the elderly, infirm or anyone in need of
care and attention;

Which, unless you must have professional certification, doesn't mean contractors in IT.

[Ketto]

I’m finding references being requested less and less these days prior to starting a contract. But on the flip side I’m seeing more and more contractors being taken on and then canned within weeks due to poor performance!

[Sausage Surprise]

1.

Plus start looking round.

In my one and only gig where this happened, I did the same and already had a gig lined up when the inevitable bullet came (day before Christmas Eve).
Bunch of tw*ts they were.

[LondonManc]

I’m finding references being requested less and less these days prior to starting a contract. But on the flip side I’m seeing more and more contractors being taken on and then canned within weeks due to poor performance!

That potentially says more about the interviewer....

[NigelJK]

So not quite "required to take up on ALL of their clients behalf" then

The agencies are *supposed* to adhere to the regulations, they are not supposed to assume you want to opt out.

As I said I didn't dig too deep but the regulations are there to stop poor standard candidates getting put forward (amongst other 'bad practice' from the agencies). I'm sure that it was a legal requirement to gather the references before you started (and only mention opting out BEFORE putting you up in the first place).

[northernladuk]

As I said I didn't dig too deep but the regulations are there to stop poor standard candidates getting put forward (amongst other 'bad practice' from the agencies). .

Erm.. I not sure that's the case. It was to provide agencies workers with protection wasn't it?