Asked to train another contractor

[SorenLorensen]

Hey all, looking for opinions on this. Have been asked to train another contractor at client site on a couple of key skills that currently only I provide to the client. Other contractor is a bit of a jack of all trades. I've built up significant knowledge in a particular area (a lot of it at my own cost, both monetary and time). I'm heavily inclined to just refuse, on commercial grounds. It may not go down very well, but I'm not looking to create a local competitor for no good reason.

What's the general thoughts on this sort of situation?

[northernladuk]

Well if you refuse do you think they are going to keep you on?

How did you get these skills?

[SueEllen]

If your skills are niche and you can easily find another client then refuse.

Otherwise train him up and because you are not a trainer the contractor will not be able to do what you do.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

Two options:

1. Sorry, MyCo does not currently offer training services.
2. Yes, MyCo would be happy to provide training services on receipt of an appropriate contract schedule, here's my fee: £xxx.

If you go for 2, think carefully about your fee. If you're only charging your usual day rate you're probably underselling yourself.

[northernladyuk]

Refer client to suity for training services.

[uk contractor]

They want you out & to train the other contractor before leaving or being asked to leave clearly! You are probably out regardless so perhaps train them slowly to gain a few extra days out of it & start looking elsewhere.

[malvolio]

Hmmm. Probably not a replacement strategy. Think about it; they have one skilled resource who presumably has some value to them, but if he goes under a bus or something similar they don't have anyone. If they can persuade the resource to train up a copy of himself, then they have two, which is much less of a risk. Why, then, would they go back to one by ditching the more skilled one? I'm thinking some people need to work on the business skills side...

However the OP is not a trainer and training people is not in his current contract. If he accepts this then bang goes IR35 since he is clearly under D&C.

The correct answer has been given. Negotiate a separate contract schedule at a sensible rate with defined deliverables in terms of the trainee's planned abilities. It is then a simple negotiation: pay me this under these Ts&Cs or it doesn't happen and I will stick with what you are paying me to do.

Or refuse outright since it is weakening your own position significantly - which is what they want to happen of course.

HTH...

[cojak]

Hmmm. Probably not a replacement strategy. Think about it; they have one skilled resource who presumably has some value to them, but if he goes under a bus or something similar they don't have anyone. If they can persuade the resource to train up a copy of himself, then they have two, which is much less of a risk. Why, then, would they go back to one by ditching the more skilled one? I'm thinking some people need to work on the business skills side...

However the OP is not a trainer and training people is not in his current contract. If he accepts this then bang goes IR35 since he is clearly under D&C.

The correct answer has been given. Negotiate a separate contract schedule at a sensible rate with defined deliverables in terms of the trainee's planned abilities. It is then a simple negotiation: pay me this under these Ts&Cs or it doesn't happen and I will stick with what you are paying me to do.

Or refuse outright since it is weakening your own position significantly - which is what they want to happen of course.

HTH...

There's more to knowledge transfer than just the 'what' - anyone can get the 'what' by reading a book or watching YouTube.

The secret is how to apply the 'what' (remember the plumber and the hammer story?).

Give the other guy some of the 'what', but never give him the 'how'.

And make sure that the spec explains exactly that. Most clients don't understand the difference.

[eek]

My actual answer to this is that:-

1) I can but it's not included within the job description so would require a new contract and due to the change in requirements it will be at a new rate x, with an extension confirmed now.

2) regardless of 1 even if i trained him / her up they may actually do more harm then good for a little knowledge is dangerous.

[eek]

My actual answer to this is that:-

1) I can but it's not included within the job description so would require a new contract and due to the change in requirements it will be at a new rate x, with an extension confirmed now.

2) regardless of 1 even if i trained him / her up they may actually do more harm then good for a little knowledge is dangerous.

Prime examples of that:-

Previous clientco had someone who was going to take over support of the system. Had been on multiple training courses so was fully trained according to client, just couldn't comprehend how the internals of the system worked and just did exactly what he asked to do rather than applying that request to how the system did things. Heck I even told him how to do things the proper way and he would ignore that and do it his way.

Current client (unsurprisingly if you know my current client) have some people who know the internals and how to do things but fail on the other things. Hence the happy paths are fine but basics like documenting how to deploy to a new system, writing defensive code that catches basic errors is missing, even writing custom error messages to tell people how to solve the issue... Granted the above is probably unique to this individual but its something I really wasn't expecting...