2 year rule according to client

[Bryn Rogers]

I have been on my current gig for just under 2 years and am about to get kicked out due to the '2 year rule'.

This isnt the HMRC 2 year rule, its the clients '2 year rule' which is shrouded in mystery. I say this because my project manager cannot get a straight answer from the big bosses up above about why I cant continue after 2 years and how long I need to be absent if I was to return on a future gig.

Is this '2 year rule' commonplace amongst clients and is it something official or something someone's pulled out of their hat?

[NotAllThere]

My client has a two year rule. The idea is that if you're there for two years or more, then really you should be permie.

Currently on my 4th years a contractor. Had to accept only 2 days a week to start with (after exceeding 2 years), but then other departements started using me, and now I'm here all week. (try the veal)

[malvolio]

I have been on my current gig for just under 2 years and am about to get kicked out due to the '2 year rule'.

This isnt the HMRC 2 year rule, its the clients '2 year rule' which is shrouded in mystery. I say this because my project manager cannot get a straight answer from the big bosses up above about why I cant continue after 2 years and how long I need to be absent if I was to return on a future gig.

Is this '2 year rule' commonplace amongst clients and is it something official or something someone's pulled out of their hat?

It's mythical. If you are entitled to employement rights by virtue of your position you are entitled to them on the first day your there every bit as much as you are after two years. You can argue that staaying with a client for a long time is a sign of a well run business: clearly your client is happy, you have a steady profit stream and you have minimal overheads keeping the business running.

They're being dumb. Sadly, they're also well within their rights to set whatever rules they want.

[Moscow Mule]

I was told by a chap from Vodafone that their policy is 6 months...

[Clippy]

Sounds like more HR nonsense.

[sal626]

My friend was at clientco (Big oil) and the new VP came in and decided any contractor there longer then two years had to go, and could not return for 12 or 18 months. Nothing to do with HMRC, risk etc…..the VP just didn ‘t like contractors – he thought they cost the company more then a permie.

[northernladuk]

You can kind of understand most companies won't know what on earth is going on here and won't commit. I would guess they generally don't spend much time investigating HR policy for contractors and if someone suggested that they need to put something in place for contractors approaching 2 years service he would get shot for wasting so much money on contractors over such a long period of time.

Hardly suprising the permies are treating it like a hot potatoe and doing their best to walk away from the issue or cover their backs.

Part of contractor life i would have thought.

[SuperZ]

It's mythical. If you are entitled to employement rights by virtue of your position you are entitled to them on the first day your there every bit as much as you are after two years. You can argue that staaying with a client for a long time is a sign of a well run business: clearly your client is happy, you have a steady profit stream and you have minimal overheads keeping the business running.

They're being dumb. Sadly, they're also well within their rights to set whatever rules they want.

From our side it is a sign of a well run business, from the client side it isn`t. As much as I like a long contract (as I`m sure we all do), the client should be hiring or retraining a permie instead if they need someone for the long term.
Also,it can affect the permies (jealousy and all that green eyed stuff), so keeping us on board for a long time isn`t good for staff moral. I remember once hearing my self the words "the union aren`t happy with our crap pay rise when the <government client> employs a lot of expensive contractors for sometimes a few years"

[Coalman]

From our side it is a sign of a well run business, from the client side it isn`t. As much as I like a long contract (as I`m sure we all do), the client should be hiring or retraining a permie instead if they need someone for the long term.
Also,it can affect the permies (jealousy and all that green eyed stuff), so keeping us on board for a long time isn`t good for staff moral. I remember once hearing my self the words "the union aren`t happy with our crap pay rise when the <government client> employs a lot of expensive contractors for sometimes a few years"

This is not always true. I work on projects that typically take between 18 months and 30 months to complete so a two year rule would be very detrimental to the client and the clients project.

[jmo21]

current client co has a 9 month rule so end of current contract will be that for me.

I'm sure however if someone high enough up the chain wanted me to stay then that could be overridden.