Are you opted in or out?

[Eirikur]

Every agency tells me "we have hundreds of contractors out there and they are all opted out";
I know they are lying but just wanted to see what you guys did

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

Currently on my first contract through an agent in about 7 years. Contract was good, required a few small tweaks to pass a QDOS review but that's it. I was never asked to opt-out or asked to sign any explicit opt-out. I don't remember seeing anything about it in the contract either.

So I guess that makes me opted in.

The last time I did an agency job, I did have some annoying back and forth with them over opting out. I got the usual "all of our contractors opt out no problem", even had one of their legal guys calling me to say it would be "good for IR35". IIRC I declined opting out but these days, I'm not bothered either way. Agency jobs are the exception, not the rule, for me.

Edit: the only reference to any kind of regs in my contract is the following:

IMPORTANT NOTICE
This contract for services is subject to the definitions above and the terms and conditions overleaf.
The Supplier agrees to provide [AGENT] with the Services on the terms and conditions overleaf which the Supplier acknowledges it has fully read and understood. The Supplier acknowledges that it will not act under the control of the Client or End User and that for the purposes of the Employment Agencies Act 1973 [AGENT] is not acting as an Employment Business. Subject to communication by any means of this document by [AGENT] to the Supplier prior to the Commencement Date, the provision by the Supplier of any part of the Services shall be deemed to be acceptance of this agreement whether or not this document is signed by the Supplier.

[northernladuk]

Can you add a 'Don't care' option so we can also judge how many don't care about this whole are?

Or an 'In limbo as they didn't do whatever the did properly' option?

Or an 'Well I'm opted in but they think I'm opted out because they screwed up the opted out' option?

[BlasterBates]

Employment regulations are irrelevant to a successful contractor. The contract is the place to get whatever conditions you require. Rather than fighting to get yourself covered by "employment" regulations those conditions that are important should be written into the contract.

[DeludedKitten]

Rather than fighting to get yourself covered by "employment" regulations those conditions that are important should be written into the contract.

The Conduct of Employment Agencies and Business Regulations have nothing to do with "employment" regulations at all - they are regulating agencies that people use.

I've heard the same argument from a few people over the year ("you're not a real business if you don't want to opt out") and I'd be interested to know how successful people are in getting the same protections in their contracts - I can't believe that may agencies willingly include such a short clause to go direct or include a clause that means you get paid even if they don't. Maybe those aren't inportant to some people but they are the main protections that refusing to opt out of the regulations give me.

[malvolio]

Ten years in and people are still unclear.

1. You can't opt in, you can only opt out.


2. Workers and agencies have differing opinions on what constitutes "introduction". Both are correct.


3. However the only way to be certain is to send a clear opt out with your original job application. Everything else is ambiguous. Agency opt-out forms are a nonsense, 90% of the time.


4. Agencies are perfectly free to trade with anyone they like under any conditions they like, including not dealing with people that don't opt out (Why I leave as an exercise for the reader, but it's to do with money and risk)


5. In or Out has no relevance to IR35 in any conceivable way. At best it is a lever to get a better contract (says IPSE) but given your contract probably bears little relationship to the agency/client one, that is a bit moot.


6. And until someone has the balls to take an agency to court over something that the opt out covers, nothing is going to change.

7. And finally, the opt out is intended for the use of companies - as in genuine businesses - who would have problems if they had to apply the Regs to their sub-contract staff, nobody else. The agencies are simply taking advantage of sloppy legislation and drafting.


HTH.

[BlasterBates]

The Conduct of Employment Agencies and Business Regulations have nothing to do with "employment" regulations at all - they are regulating agencies that people use.

I've heard the same argument from a few people over the year ("you're not a real business if you don't want to opt out") and I'd be interested to know how successful people are in getting the same protections in their contracts - I can't believe that may agencies willingly include such a short clause to go direct or include a clause that means you get paid even if they don't. Maybe those aren't inportant to some people but they are the main protections that refusing to opt out of the regulations give me.

It is The Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations

It is designed to protect temporary employees and is all about employment. Of course as a Ltd company working under the control of a client you are also subject to the regulations because in effect you're an employee.

[DeludedKitten]

It is designed to protect temporary employees and is all about employment.

No it isn't.

Of course as a Ltd company working under the control of a client you are also subject to the regulations because in effect you're an employee.

No I'm not.

[BlasterBates]

No it isn't.


No I'm not.

Then you aren't covered by the regulations.

[SueEllen]

The Conduct of Employment Agencies and Business Regulations have nothing to do with "employment" regulations at all - they are regulating agencies that people use.

I've heard the same argument from a few people over the year ("you're not a real business if you don't want to opt out") and I'd be interested to know how successful people are in getting the same protections in their contracts - I can't believe that may agencies willingly include such a short clause to go direct or include a clause that means you get paid even if they don't. Maybe those aren't inportant to some people but they are the main protections that refusing to opt out of the regulations give me.

I've got such weird things in my contracts.

Some organisations are simply to large so any restraint of trade clause would never be enforceable.

I negotiate out paid after being paid clauses. I have discovered some clients also place limits on when agencies can pay sub-contractors.