Trouble Moving from Contract to Perm

[Fat Tony]

..

[northernladuk]

I would most definately follow this one up, not to be an arse just to get a feel of why and how this might affect future applications.

A request for clarrification on the policy not to employ ex-contractors does not seem a lot to ask. I feel you need to do this in the first case just to make sure someone isn't bulltulipting you for a start. How do you know the agent isn't stiffing you and this is just an excuse?

Defiantely have a poke about IMHO

[cojak]

It would say bugger-all.

That's the way of the world in Contractor Land...

[lje]

Now, I can understand why some employers might worry about you jumping ship in better times etc., but surely they can't discriminate against someone based on how they've chosen to work previously. If they'd said I was too old to be considered they'd be breaking the law.

The whole selection process is about discrimination if you want to view it that way. Which people do they select for interview? Those with the best matching experience - is that discrimiation? Who do they offer the job to? The person who seemed like they would fit in best with the team - is that discrimination?

If the company have had bad experiences in the past with offering ex-contractors permie positions and having them leave a few months later when there are more contracts about then you can understand them not wanting to employee ex-contractors again.

Personally I think it's a bad policy to have. I contracted many years ago - went back to perm for about a decade and then started contracting again. Not exactly a bad risk for those employers who I permed with. But recruitment is full of bad policies - that doesn't make it illegal.

[BolshieBastard]

The whole selection process is about discrimination if you want to view it that way. Which people do they select for interview? Those with the best matching experience - is that discrimiation? Who do they offer the job to? The person who seemed like they would fit in best with the team - is that discrimination?

If the company have had bad experiences in the past with offering ex-contractors permie positions and having them leave a few months later when there are more contracts about then you can understand them not wanting to employee ex-contractors again.

Personally I think it's a bad policy to have. I contracted many years ago - went back to perm for about a decade and then started contracting again. Not exactly a bad risk for those employers who I permed with. But recruitment is full of bad policies - that doesn't make it illegal.

I think the definition of discrimination is when one looks negatively at a person's attributes rather than what they can or cannot do. So, calling people for interview based on their experience isnt discrimination.

Not calling someone for interview because of their religion, accent, age, being an 'ex' contractor most definitely is discrimination.

Personally, I dont think companies should be allowed to get away with this and I'd be inclined to follow it up.

If the OP had been knocked back after interview, they could argue he \ she wasnt good enough but, they've clearly discriminated against him \ her by saying they have a policy not to employ ex contractors for permie roles.

Oh and btw, I've no interest in returning to permiedom.

[lje]

I think the definition of discrimination is when one looks negatively at a person's attributes rather than what they can or cannot do. So, calling people for interview based on their experience isnt discrimination.

Not calling someone for interview because of their religion, accent, age, being an 'ex' contractor most definitely is discrimination.

I agree completely on the religion / accent / age stuff. I just don't view being an ex-contractor in the same way. Contracting is often a life style choice and it seems reasonable that an employer could be worried about that. If they've got loads of applications then they may decide not to employ anyone who has been a contractor because of the extra risk they believe that would open them to. I don't think it's a legislative issue.

As I said before I think it's a barmy policy - I just don't think it's an illegal one.

[TheFaQQer]

Explain to them that you weren't a contractor - you were employed by a small IT consultancy (that you just happen to have owned). Completely different than contractor scum - you stuck to that role for n years etc.

HR won't know the difference.

[deckster]

As I said before I think it's a barmy policy - I just don't think it's an illegal one.

Barmy and, sadly, very very common. When I was interviewing last year, every permie interviewer without exception wanted to know why I was giving up contracting. The job I finally took was offered with the starting words "Now we don't normally make offers to ex-contractors, but..."

[escapeUK]

If you have escaped from being a slave to being free, then of course they are going to look at you suspicously.

You want to be a slave again??

They also know that if they treat you badly, (like they do their other slaves) you will just free yourself. You did it before, you will do it again.

[Menelaus]

Worryingly, I've come up against this as well - "no, you were a contractor, therefore you're not reliable". My response has been that (as FAQ has suggested above) I wasn't a contractor, I was employed by a niche consulting practice (that goes down really well) and therefore I've been employed by the same company for the past eight years.