Fidelity tie-in extended on renewal

[grey_lady]

My agency has extended their tie-in period on the renewal of my contract from 6 months to 12, any thoughts on this? personally im inclinded to cross it out and put 6 months back in but in these uncertain times maybe i should just sign?

[deckster]

I'd cross it out and put 3 months just for them being cheeky. The worst that'll happen is they put it back to 6 months.

In any case 12 months is generally considered unenforceable for these kinds of clauses, so there's an argument you could just sign it and completely ignore the clause if it came down to it.

[The Agents View]

The clause doesn't apply to you - it applies to the client - they're the ones who would get hit with a whopping bill if it happened.

I'd just sign it if it was me as it has no risk to you.

HTH

TAV

[NotAllThere]

If it doesn't apply to the contractor, why is it in his/her contract?

[The Agents View]

Im no legal expert - and every contract is different, but I believe it's because the service providers contracts have to reflect the details contained in that of the client.

If it's worded the same as ours, it states that a fee will become payable by the client if they engage the candidate on a direct basis within 6 months of the initial introduction, or the end of the last contract. I've never seen it come back on a contractor, only ever a client.

Cheers
TAV

[DodgyAgent]

I'd cross it out and put 3 months just for them being cheeky. The worst that'll happen is they put it back to 6 months.

In any case 12 months is generally considered unenforceable for these kinds of clauses, so there's an argument you could just sign it and completely ignore the clause if it came down to it.

Good advice. If you signed 6 months then it is probably enforceable (if they can be arsed) If you sign for 12 months then they wont be able to enforce it.

[DodgyAgent]

Im no legal expert - and every contract is different, but I believe it's because the service providers contracts have to reflect the details contained in that of the client.

If it's worded the same as ours, it states that a fee will become payable by the client if they engage the candidate on a direct basis within 6 months of the initial introduction, or the end of the last contract. I've never seen it come back on a contractor, only ever a client.

Cheers
TAV

Bo**ocks

[grey_lady]

It has always said that its not just restricted to the client company, but any company that I work with (that could mean customers, suppliers etc) through the client company. I assume that they would only try and enforce that part of it by coming after me.

Seems like the agency are changing the terms in their favour, but i guess with times like these i should just be happy with whatever terms as long as im in a contract!

[DodgyAgent]

It has always said that its not just restricted to the client company, but any company that I work with (that could mean customers, suppliers etc) through the client company. I assume that they would only try and enforce that part of it by coming after me.

Seems like the agency are changing the terms in their favour, but i guess with times like these i should just be happy with whatever terms as long as im in a contract!

By applying the tie in clause to both client and contractor they (sorry "we") are doubling our chances of preventing it from happening.

[grey_lady]

So is 12 months tie-in becoming the norm now?
my agency implied that it is.