Unequal termination clauses in contract

[northernladuk]

a non-symmetrical notice period it is an indicator of client being a potential trouble-maker.

Balderdash. How on earth can you get that? It's in there for business reasons and in a vast majority of cases is never invoked.

it is not a reason for saying no if you don't have something else. in the case that you take the role, and you're doing well and ok with the client, maybe you could mention that to him, that's not fair.

Why isn't it fair? Fair on who? You wouldn't be complaining it wasn't fair if it was in your favour would you? Your contract isn't with the client so you shouldn't be asking them.

i don't think they're irrelevant, in my whole contracting life they were respected (both ways). it's a way of ending well the relationship

Just because they have been respected doesn't mean they aren't irrelevant. How many times have you given or been giving notice? I've given it once in 13 years.
It's there in the contract that they can withdraw work and you don't get paid. If they are cut throat and they really want you out they just ask you not to come in again. They contract will run but you get no money so effectively instant dismissal. So the notice period is irrelevant. If they want to honour that's up to them but they really don't need to.

[SussexSeagull]

Most of my contracts have been asymmetrical notice periods and I don't think in itself it has ever been a problem. They will keep you while there is work and someone is willing to pay for it and wave goodbye when that stops.

[perplexed]

I don't worry about notice periods. Client simply offers no work, adios.

One time notice period on my side was 2 weeks, as work had been completed made little sense me invoking 2 weeks notice in that instance, client happily agreed, more than happy work finished early ahead of timescale and obvs cheaper than expected by two weeks.

Better to leave a client happy, especially these days.

I do wonder if those advocating leaving by taking a sickie and holiday have conveniently ignored that exposes their ham of a substitution clause given no attempt to use it...

[northernladuk]

I don't worry about notice periods. Client simply offers no work, adios.

One time notice period on my side was 2 weeks, as work had been completed made little sense me invoking 2 weeks notice in that instance, client happily agreed, more than happy work finished early ahead of timescale and obvs cheaper than expected by two weeks.

Better to leave a client happy, especially these days.

I do wonder if those advocating leaving by taking a sickie and holiday have conveniently ignored that exposes their ham of a substitution clause given no attempt to use it...

Totally all this. Get them to terminate in an email and you've got a nice bit of IR35 defence fodder as well.

[biergarten]

Balderdash. How on earth can you get that? It's in there for business reasons and in a vast majority of cases is never invoked.

putting an asymmetrical notice is for me an obvious "smell"

Why isn't it fair? Fair on who? You wouldn't be complaining it wasn't fair if it was in your favour would you? Your contract isn't with the client so you shouldn't be asking them.

sorry, I used the wrong words. I meant, mention to them that it is probably not doing any good to their hiring process (as some people, like me notice these things)

[northernladuk]

putting an asymmetrical notice is for me an obvious "smell"

Good for you. No one else seems to agree so we will leave that one for you.

sorry, I used the wrong words. I meant, mention to them that it is probably not doing any good to their hiring process (as some people, like me notice these things)

So they tell you take it or leave it. Non negotiable and the next contractor takes the gig. No problems to the hiring process.

[NotAllThere]

putting an asymmetrical notice is for me an obvious "smell"

Balderdash. As a hiring manager, I expected my contractors to not be able to give me notice and for me to be able to give them immediate notice. The people I hired were people with many years of experience of contracting, with whom I'd originally contracted.

[northernladuk]

Balderdash. As a hiring manager, I expected my contractors to not be able to give me notice and for me to be able to give them immediate notice. The people I hired were people with many years of experience of contracting, with whom I'd originally contracted.

I smell something and it's nothing to do with notice periods.

[biergarten]

Good for you. No one else seems to agree so we will leave that one for you.



So they tell you take it or leave it. Non negotiable and the next contractor takes the gig. No problems to the hiring process.

in my post i am not talking about telling them to change my notice (I've already accepted it), i am talking about telling them that it doesn't look good. As a contractor i've been involved in the process of hiring people for the end client, and they normally ask me for other contractors they could hire.

[NotAllThere]

The reason it was in my contracts is that it helps demonstrate lack of MOO, which looks fairly good.

Anyway it's irrelevant. Notice periods in contractor contracts only bite the contractor, not the client. The client can dispose of a contractor just by saying "we have no work for you". The contractor, if they have a notice period, must work it (assuming that there is work within the remit of their contract). In that sense, all contractor contracts are unequal.

But if you think it smells - that's up to you. I've only got 25 years experience across a number of industry in a number of countries; what do I know?

Anyway, thread locked as there it nothing new to say. And I like having the last word.