I get frustrated reading so many posts where it is evident that contractors don't seem to know what they're entitled to know or not when dealing with recruiters. Obviously, newbies to contractors aren't necessarily going to know, so I'm not expressing criticism at all. My post is intended to help them out too. Most of the information you need to know can be found on the PGC website and other contractor forums that inform newbies to contracting.
Who the heck do you think you are?
For those who don't know, I'm not a solicitor, accountant or a recruiter - I'm a contractor working at fairly senior level in a project management and change management capacity. I have both private clients and use recruiters too. If you are in any doubt about the information provided below I think it is accurate, and lay authoratitive but in no way should be taken as legal advice. However, I have gleaned all of it from reading the legislation and getting advice from legal advisors and accountants who do know the ins and outs of what contractors need to know from an formal authoratitive standpoint. Some of what I've written below is also my opinion and guidance based on experience with recruiters.
So here goes.....
Read the Employment Agencies Act thoroughly - particularly the bit on employment businesses and what they are supposed to represent and what they are legally obliged to do before 'supplying' candidates to the end-client. You can find this information under the DTI website. Remember that employment businesses aren't 'agencies' at all even though we constantly inaccurately refer to them as such. They are working on behalf of the end-client to source candidates, they are not there to 'find you work' on act on your behalf in any way.
Employment business can't charge you for 'job finding services.' I don't think many of us are in any doubt about that and most employment business won't try to charge anything. They may, however, try to disincentivise you to remain opted in by offering a lower rate than advertised or what you know the job is worth or charging you an admin fee for carrying out the mandatory checks. Again, I doubt this is legitimate unless they can justify these additional charges realistically.
Employment Businesses are meant to state specifically on their job board adverts that they are acting in the capacity of an employment business. This is law but not really that important to us as far as finding new gigs. It might be useful to make a note of when they don't though if you have any further problems with the recruiters further down the line though. Always take a copy of the job ads you use to find new business because once the role is sourced, the job ads disappear never to be recovered.
Before forwarding your CV to an end-client they must tell you who the end-client is. It's not OK for them to only tell you who they are when an interview is arranged. I'm surprised at how many contractors are happy to be kept in the dark over something so important. It's also the case that the role is likely to be live rather than fake if the recruiter tells you the client's name, it may also demonstrate that they have a good relationship with the client and that they're not using your CV for speculative purposes and are on their PSL as a first tier supplier if that's a supply side requirement, and they should also forward you the job spec that outlines fully what the role requires. Do you want to be represented without this information????
Employment businesses must carry out mandatory checks to ensure 'suitability' of candidates before supplying a candidate to the end client. As I've said recently on other threads, this means basic ID checks (passport), qualifications and references. This may not be the case if the candidate has already expressed an early desire opt out and signed the opting out form, but in practice, you should only be given the option to opt out not expected to sign the form opting out prior to being interviewed. You can tell the agency you intend to opt out if you think you might not be represented but then you are perfectly entitled to tell them afterwards you are remaining opted in once you are offered the gig.
Once you have been interviewed the agency may still pressurise you to opt out. In fact, I believe that it is the case that you must stay opted in once you've been introduced to the client and interviewed. Therefore, if you get the gig, signing the opt out form would be daft unless you have given reason to (like your brolly will only deal with opted out contractors) but if you do make this mistake you should be able to reverse this decision, should you want to, before you start on site. You might have a fight on your hands though but the dates the form was signed and the date of the interview should clarify any discrepancies about where you actually stand.
If an agency tells you that the end-client won't consider taking on any opted out contractors and make this a condition for representing you to the end-client this is unlikely to be true and the recruiter is acting unlawfully. However, it is hard to prove because when they send you an e-mail and opt out form the form will specifically state that the contractor has 'agreed' to opt out which suggests that it is something you actually wanted to do rather than something you felt obliged to do. Some will tell you that opting in is only for Chinese cockle pickers and minimum wage temps not for professional contractors on high rates. This is not true at all, the legislation applies to ALL contractors. As far as the end-client is concerned, the opt out regulations are nothing to do with them, it's strictly between employment business' relationship with candidates. If you are concerned you won't be represented or interviewed due to recruiter sabotage favouring opted out contractors just express an intention to opt out until after the interview and offer and then state that you have changed your mind and wish to remain opted in. If you then mysteriously don't get the gig when you were led to believe it was pretty much in the bag then you should, by then, know who the end client contact is and you should really report the agency to the company. Otherwise, you should report them to the DTI Agency Standards Office. Don't bother with ATSCO because they are a huge waste of time. They act for the recruitment business, not contractors and all their efforts will be ploughed into getting their agency off the hook not backing you up.
Always back up important negotiations in writing. Don't rely on recruiter testimonies over the phone about your CV being forwarded. Always get e-mail confirmation about rates agreed too, CV being on the end-clients' desk, references checked and satisfactorily concluded and so on. Most recruiters rely on the phone far to much to convey such information, but that is a strategy to ensure that if they lie about any important negotiation outcomes they can't really be held to account because no one can prove that they did say what they told you.
Never give a bottom line rate to the recruiter about what you are prepared to get for a role. This is always likely to be your top rate because the recruiter will try to increase their own mark-up at your expense whilst still billing the client for a rate commensurate with your top desired rate. Instead, give a recruiter a between X and Y rate which is dependant on the scope of the role and other important information that might come up at interview. When the gig is then offered you are in a stronger position to negotiate toward the top end as your agreed daily or hourly fee, if you think it is justified, but at least you will be happy with the bottom rate if the client or recruiter won't budge. Most recruiters won't risk losing the sale if they think you will pull out due to a too low rate. In practice though, your bottom line rate should always also be a rate you would be happy with because pulling out is bad for you too if you haven't got anything else lined up.
Who the heck do you think you are?
For those who don't know, I'm not a solicitor, accountant or a recruiter - I'm a contractor working at fairly senior level in a project management and change management capacity. I have both private clients and use recruiters too. If you are in any doubt about the information provided below I think it is accurate, and lay authoratitive but in no way should be taken as legal advice. However, I have gleaned all of it from reading the legislation and getting advice from legal advisors and accountants who do know the ins and outs of what contractors need to know from an formal authoratitive standpoint. Some of what I've written below is also my opinion and guidance based on experience with recruiters.
So here goes.....
Read the Employment Agencies Act thoroughly - particularly the bit on employment businesses and what they are supposed to represent and what they are legally obliged to do before 'supplying' candidates to the end-client. You can find this information under the DTI website. Remember that employment businesses aren't 'agencies' at all even though we constantly inaccurately refer to them as such. They are working on behalf of the end-client to source candidates, they are not there to 'find you work' on act on your behalf in any way.
Employment business can't charge you for 'job finding services.' I don't think many of us are in any doubt about that and most employment business won't try to charge anything. They may, however, try to disincentivise you to remain opted in by offering a lower rate than advertised or what you know the job is worth or charging you an admin fee for carrying out the mandatory checks. Again, I doubt this is legitimate unless they can justify these additional charges realistically.
Employment Businesses are meant to state specifically on their job board adverts that they are acting in the capacity of an employment business. This is law but not really that important to us as far as finding new gigs. It might be useful to make a note of when they don't though if you have any further problems with the recruiters further down the line though. Always take a copy of the job ads you use to find new business because once the role is sourced, the job ads disappear never to be recovered.
Before forwarding your CV to an end-client they must tell you who the end-client is. It's not OK for them to only tell you who they are when an interview is arranged. I'm surprised at how many contractors are happy to be kept in the dark over something so important. It's also the case that the role is likely to be live rather than fake if the recruiter tells you the client's name, it may also demonstrate that they have a good relationship with the client and that they're not using your CV for speculative purposes and are on their PSL as a first tier supplier if that's a supply side requirement, and they should also forward you the job spec that outlines fully what the role requires. Do you want to be represented without this information????
Employment businesses must carry out mandatory checks to ensure 'suitability' of candidates before supplying a candidate to the end client. As I've said recently on other threads, this means basic ID checks (passport), qualifications and references. This may not be the case if the candidate has already expressed an early desire opt out and signed the opting out form, but in practice, you should only be given the option to opt out not expected to sign the form opting out prior to being interviewed. You can tell the agency you intend to opt out if you think you might not be represented but then you are perfectly entitled to tell them afterwards you are remaining opted in once you are offered the gig.
Once you have been interviewed the agency may still pressurise you to opt out. In fact, I believe that it is the case that you must stay opted in once you've been introduced to the client and interviewed. Therefore, if you get the gig, signing the opt out form would be daft unless you have given reason to (like your brolly will only deal with opted out contractors) but if you do make this mistake you should be able to reverse this decision, should you want to, before you start on site. You might have a fight on your hands though but the dates the form was signed and the date of the interview should clarify any discrepancies about where you actually stand.
If an agency tells you that the end-client won't consider taking on any opted out contractors and make this a condition for representing you to the end-client this is unlikely to be true and the recruiter is acting unlawfully. However, it is hard to prove because when they send you an e-mail and opt out form the form will specifically state that the contractor has 'agreed' to opt out which suggests that it is something you actually wanted to do rather than something you felt obliged to do. Some will tell you that opting in is only for Chinese cockle pickers and minimum wage temps not for professional contractors on high rates. This is not true at all, the legislation applies to ALL contractors. As far as the end-client is concerned, the opt out regulations are nothing to do with them, it's strictly between employment business' relationship with candidates. If you are concerned you won't be represented or interviewed due to recruiter sabotage favouring opted out contractors just express an intention to opt out until after the interview and offer and then state that you have changed your mind and wish to remain opted in. If you then mysteriously don't get the gig when you were led to believe it was pretty much in the bag then you should, by then, know who the end client contact is and you should really report the agency to the company. Otherwise, you should report them to the DTI Agency Standards Office. Don't bother with ATSCO because they are a huge waste of time. They act for the recruitment business, not contractors and all their efforts will be ploughed into getting their agency off the hook not backing you up.
Always back up important negotiations in writing. Don't rely on recruiter testimonies over the phone about your CV being forwarded. Always get e-mail confirmation about rates agreed too, CV being on the end-clients' desk, references checked and satisfactorily concluded and so on. Most recruiters rely on the phone far to much to convey such information, but that is a strategy to ensure that if they lie about any important negotiation outcomes they can't really be held to account because no one can prove that they did say what they told you.
Never give a bottom line rate to the recruiter about what you are prepared to get for a role. This is always likely to be your top rate because the recruiter will try to increase their own mark-up at your expense whilst still billing the client for a rate commensurate with your top desired rate. Instead, give a recruiter a between X and Y rate which is dependant on the scope of the role and other important information that might come up at interview. When the gig is then offered you are in a stronger position to negotiate toward the top end as your agreed daily or hourly fee, if you think it is justified, but at least you will be happy with the bottom rate if the client or recruiter won't budge. Most recruiters won't risk losing the sale if they think you will pull out due to a too low rate. In practice though, your bottom line rate should always also be a rate you would be happy with because pulling out is bad for you too if you haven't got anything else lined up.
Comment