Contract Dilemma

[fargaman]

This is my first post hear....
after some years break in permie land, I have rejoined the contracting world..
The market for my skills seems to be much stronger than I initially anticipated.

Last week I was offered a 3 month contract doing a fairly interesting job at an investment bank for a good rate. I verbally accepted although told the agent I had other interviews in the pipeline.

yesterday I was offered a 6 month rolling contract for 10 percent more money at another investment bank, although the work has a strong support element and is marginally less interesting.

both agents claim that their contract falls outside of IR35. I have asked them to provide me with the contracts so I can get them assessed by B+C (is it worth doing this?)

I am not sure which contract to accept...the following thoughts are weighing on my mind.

1) I am concerned about the 3 month length of the first contract. I dont want to be looking again in 12 weeks time, when I could have something more long term at the second - although the agent informs me there is a strong possibilty for renewal, but they would say that.

2) If I walk away from the first offer, will I get a bad name for retracting on my verbal agreement? does this matter? does it happen often? Should I care? Are there repercussions? I ask this, cos in the past I have never been in this position....and the agency psychological warefare has already begun in earnest...

3) although the first offer is for less money and shorter, I will be handed more responsibility than the second. It is business facing/ front office based / greenfield development with a heavy design and architectural element whereas the second contract is not business facing at all / back office type work and working with existing platforms....

this is my first investment banking position in a very long time...

what would you do in my position???

[DS23]

take the first one - greenfield and design means it will extend unless you don't fit. better to earn a bit less and enjoy it. better for the cv too. you could try and squeeze the rate i suppose but they might call your bluff..

[freakydancer]

Whichever one pays you more.

HTH

[Sockpuppet]

Always get the contracts checked by B&C.

Screw the agents. When they can make money out of youthey will. They will always come back for more.

[malvolio]

Three months isn't a problem, more than likely you will be renewed assuming you don't screw up. Either way, I'd go for the one that enhances the CV at your stage of the game, rate isn't everything (although it's pretty damn important!).

Note for the future: do not accept, even verbally, if you have other options still active: tell them you are interested but must wait for the other offer first. The agent won't like it, but it is business you're in, not agent-pleasing. If the client likes you they won't really mind that much and they are the important ones.

[Bluebird]

I was in a similar position last year, I agreed to a 3 month gig only to get offered a 6 month one at a better rate a couple of days later.

When I initially told the agency they were pissed with me, but in the last month or so they have come back asking when I'm available..

Don't forget the Agencies first priority is to place people, even if you've annoyed them in the past they'll come back if there's £££ in it for them.

[lukemg]

Tell the first agent about your other offer, say you will go with his role if he will match it - ball in his court.
If he says no/you agreed, blah blah - take the other one AND it is his fault you gave him a choice.
If he says ok (after a whinge) - take his.
Easy.
Don't sweat the 3 months starter, most are like that.

[PAG]

I agree with lukemg.
I also started with 3 months contract. today it's been 9 months. and I am still here. This is also my first contract before I used to be permi.

One thing I have learned is that you do contracting for Money and no company promotion and objective review bulls**t.

All the best.