Same job but different rate with different agencies

[Lolas Cat]

An agent A called with a potential gig for xx/h. Long term contract (1 year). Now I see that another agency is offering more for the same job.

I already completed a written test for the first one but didn't promise him any exclusivity.

Can I ditch the first one and apply via the second one that pays more? What behaviour can I expect from the first agent?

[NotAllThere]

The second agent could be lying. You could negotiate with agent A, on the basis that B is offering more. But I leave negotiations on rate until I've been offered the gig.

[pmeswani]

An agent A called with a potential gig for xx/h. Long term contract (1 year). Now I see that another agency is offering more for the same job.

I already completed a written test for the first one but didn't promise him any exclusivity.

Can I ditch the first one and apply via the second one that pays more? What behaviour can I expect from the first agent?

Can you confirm that the first agent has already represented you to the client? If you can, then you have given consent to the first agent to soley represent you to the client. By ditching the first agent, you are likely to rule yourself out, as the first agent may tell the client you are no longer interested in the role.

A part of being a contractor is the ability to negotiate your rate with the agency who is representing you. Trying to be greedy by jumping between agencies could cost you the opportunity. Also, Agency B may be trying to trap you so that they can put forward one of their own candidates instead of you.

To answer your question, yes you can ditch your agent and go with whoever you want, but consider the consequences of what you are asking for, and ask yourself is it worth it?

[Lolas Cat]

Thanks for your answers and advice, folks.

So the rate that they put on the job ad is always negotiable, even though it is specified to a particular figure? I mean, if it states f ex 400/day, it is normal to negotiate it again, when there is a job offer?

[MarillionFan]

Thanks for your answers and advice, folks.

So the rate that they put on the job ad is always negotiable, even though it is specified to a particular figure? I mean, if it states f ex 400/day, it is normal to negotiate it again, when there is a job offer?

No not really. You normally agree a price to go in at. Then interview. It's considered bad show to negotiate afterwards but some(like NAT) do do it(obviously)

[Wanderer]

So the rate that they put on the job ad is always negotiable, even though it is specified to a particular figure? I mean, if it states f ex 400/day, it is normal to negotiate it again, when there is a job offer?

Oh FFS. Of course it's negotiable! Part of doing business is being able to negotiate. Why do so many people shy away from this?

To spell it out, here's my take on business 101 for the shrinking violets out there:

1. Job offer gets advertised by agency, rate is X specification is Y. This is called an Invitation to treat. The job may or may not exist and the rate is a opening bid.
2. Contractor speaks to agent, agrees that rate X is OK, spec seems fine, MyLTD is willing to consider doing this job. You've accepted their invitation, that doesn't mean you are going to do the job, just that you are wiling to negotiate (treat).
3. Contractor meets with end client, finds out that spec is something vaguely like what the agent said it was. The contractor makes their pitch to the client and see if the client wants to engage them. If they do then the rate is negotiated with the agency, occasionally the client will discuss the rate directly with the contractor but only do this if the client makes the first move on this.
4. Client instructs the agency to engage the contractor. Agency offers contractor the job at a particular rate, somewhere near the original rate discussed.
5. After consideration of the detailed job spec, specific requirements of the client, contract terms offered by the agent the contractor makes an offer to do the job for a particular rate, somewhere near the original rate discussed, this offer is subject to contract.
6. Agent throws a hissy fit (seems to be a negotiating tactic of theirs), eventually common ground is found and a contract is agreed still subject to contract.
7. Agent presents a formal written contract which the contractor considers (payment terms, contract length, travel requires, expenses paid, working practices, IR35, notice period etc)
8. Contract signed by both parties and becomes binding.

Agents can't be expected to have a detailed understanding the wide variety of roles they are pimping us for. They just make the introduction and we have to figure out the details ourselves, the contract becomes binding at the last step, not the first one.

However, it's bad faith to go through all this if you aren't willing to realistically consider both the job and the rate on offered at step 1. If you are invited to an interview to do a pitch for a job knowing that the client is looking to pay ~250/day, you go in and pitch to the client then demand 500/day then you are an arse.

If you enter into the negotiations in good faith then there's always plenty of scope for negotiation on both sides, +/- 30% isn't unrealistic. Maybe it turns out that the client is offering a really sweet number, work from home, chance to skill up on the job etc and wants to knock a bit off the headline rate to reflect this. Or maybe your pitch to the client went really well and there are other value added services you can offer and in return you will charge a higher rate.

[Animal]

Totally agree with wanderer. Most agency descriptions would fall foul of trade descriptions act, so impossible to decide on a rate before interview.

[Old Greg]

One way of looking at it is to put yourself in the client' shoes. They may interview some potential contractors, and like you best but say that the £400 per day you put yourself in at is too expensive now that they understand the market (i.e. the other candidates who are acceptable but not as good and in at £300 per day). They could offer you the role at £350 per day, and you wouldn't shout foul, but decide whether to take it or not. It's the same the other way round, and can't be any different as you cannot know the role requirements (and therefore the market rate) until you've met the client.

[Lolas Cat]

One way of looking at it is to put yourself in the client' shoes. They may interview some potential contractors, and like you best but say that the £400 per day you put yourself in at is too expensive now that they understand the market (i.e. the other candidates who are acceptable but not as good and in at £300 per day). They could offer you the role at £350 per day, and you wouldn't shout foul, but decide whether to take it or not. It's the same the other way round, and can't be any different as you cannot know the role requirements (and therefore the market rate) until you've met the client.

Well, in this case it is not what the client offering but what the agent is offering. And we have two agents offering different rates.

[Lolas Cat]

Thanks for your detailed reply, Wanderer. Logically, this is how it should be, I feel.