Opt out of Conduct of employment agencies 2003 act?

[northernladuk]

Spot on with this post.

Tek Systems recently forced a contractor to opt in when they signed a document opting out and would not progress the contract without it. It is illegal behavour but more than that to bully a contractor to opt in when its really their choice and their legal advice as to what is best in their situation is nothing more than unconscionable conduct. I agree, report anyone who does this.

I'm not sure that's right though. Cojak and SueEllen both asked BiS about it and got two different answers but one was that the agency can chose which method of working it wants and if you don't like it you go elsewhere. A bit like agents deciding they won't deal with umbrella contractors etc. That isn't illegal.

[Robinho]

Does opting in impact your rights to cut the agent loose? I seem to remember something about only having to wait 8 weeks?

I ask as i have a XYZ month handcuff clause in mine, they made me sign an opt out but of course like seemingly all of them they did it wrong as i'd already been introduced to the client by the time i signed up, so i am opted in. Anyway i'd quite like to cut them loose and clientco will probably be ok waiting 8 weeks to do so.

Am i remembering this correctly?

Also i have extended since being here, does that mean i'm opted out again?

[SueEllen]

Does opting in impact your rights to cut the agent loose? I seem to remember something about only having to wait 8 weeks?

I ask as i have a XYZ month handcuff clause in mine, they made me sign an opt out but of course like seemingly all of them they did it wrong as i'd already been introduced to the client by the time i signed up, so i am opted in. Anyway i'd quite like to cut them loose and clientco will probably be ok waiting 8 weeks to do so.

Am i remembering this correctly?

Also i have extended since being here, does that mean i'm opted out again?

The law is a fecking mess. There are a few arguments I've been told the agency could use to prevent you going direct with the client or through another agency.

So the best thing for you to do is find out if the client is willing to tell the agency to feck off and refuse to offer them any work. If they are then you can find a lawyer who will tell the agency if they hassle you, as they wouldn't get the work anyway they can't make a claim against you.

Oh and the extension is just a carry on from you original contract.

[northernladuk]

Does opting in impact your rights to cut the agent loose? I seem to remember something about only having to wait 8 weeks?

I ask as i have a XYZ month handcuff clause in mine, they made me sign an opt out but of course like seemingly all of them they did it wrong as i'd already been introduced to the client by the time i signed up, so i am opted in. Anyway i'd quite like to cut them loose and clientco will probably be ok waiting 8 weeks to do so.

Am i remembering this correctly?

Also i have extended since being here, does that mean i'm opted out again?

SE is right. Very rarely do handcuffs get resolved by quoting the Agency regs. Even if you are in the right the agent will forget to mention that to the client and point out the handcuff. The client will either fold as they don't want to get involved in any legalities or they will strong arm the agency saying they won't get any more business if they pursue it.

Agency regs says signed before introduction or start of work. I believe the later only applies when you have already worked at the client but the agencies read that as before you start work on your first day irrespective of if you are already known to the client. They will think they are in the right in your case becasue of this.

It's not guaranteed you'll pocket the extra that would have been the commission if that's what you are thinking. Any smart client will save that and pay you what you are already on. They will have the extra burden of looking after you.

It's also unlikely they will take you on direct if they use an agent. What you want is at the bottom of a three way pile I am afraid.

[Robinho]

It's no biggie, i was discussing with clientco a potential long term arrangements trading a bit of pay for some very nice perks and it would be nice to cut the agent out.

[simes]

Apologies if mentioned elsewhere, but I am wondering if, in time, a similar Opt Out clause could be signed in respect of the Private Sector IR35 reforms.

This to say that, with either the agency and/or the end client, we, the PSC, would sign a clause to say We are happy to operate outside of IR35, and IF any tax related discrepancy should be found later down the line, the PSC is liable for all Tax implications...?

This could be operated at Agency level. It would mitigate the end client in having to find their legal way around IR35 - Life carries on and no one skips a beat.

Thoughts?

[malvolio]

Apologies if mentioned elsewhere, but I am wondering if, in time, a similar Opt Out clause could be signed in respect of the Private Sector IR35 reforms.

This to say that, with either the agency and/or the end client, we, the PSC, would sign a clause to say We are happy to operate outside of IR35, and IF any tax related discrepancy should be found later down the line, the PSC is liable for all Tax implications...?

This could be operated at Agency level. It would mitigate the end client in having to find their legal way around IR35 - Life carries on and no one skips a beat.

Thoughts?

Probably the silliest thing I've read this week...

[northernladuk]

Don't forget to opt out of AWR while you are at it..

[BR14]

Don't forget to opt out of AWR while you are at it..

tune in, turn on, - opt out!

[simes]

Probably the silliest thing I've read this week...

I was going to ignore this response due to it being as unqualified as it was short.

I daresay I may be missing a point, but an Opt Out clause was adopted by the agencies in respect of rights for lower paid temps for contractors, and I was wondering if the same could not be adopted in respect of the burden placed on individual private clients when assessing IR35.

If we believe the reform will come to the Private sector, and we believe the clients therein will adopt a safe catch all and place all contractors as inside, and if we the contractors believe we are likely in reality to be outside, then what are the options?

1. Go inside and pick a subsequent fight with client / HMRC to prove otherwise? The results being determined far down the line.
2. Investigate some form of contractual based insurance if you will, to assure the client would be absolved of all IR35 talk no matter when.
3. Any other type of insurance...

Anyway, mine is just a wondering as to what, if anything, could be done to head off at an early stage the negative effects on contractors of private sector reform.

So if there is comment other than tumbleweed response...