Opt out of Conduct of employment agencies 2003 act?

[psychocandy]

Ask yourself, what is the difference between the agency saying no role if you want to opt in and the client will only pay 200 a day when your minimum rate expectation is 300 a day?

They are both methods to force you into accepting something they dont want to give. People can either roll over and accept what agents say for fear of losing a potential roll or stand their ground. But, if you're frightened of losing a roll for asking for what you want, you may as well become a permie imo.

Yes, agreed to some extent. But I also agree more with NLUKs standpoint... sad I know :-)

OK. £100 a day is £100 a day. Being opted out is possibly a bit of hassle for you but, in 99% of case, won't make a difference to you - £100 a day will make a difference so its two different things to fight for.

All well and good to say you need to fight for but its easy to say when you're the other person and its not your contract. Like NLUK said, how far do you push it?

Or are you telling me if it came down to it, excellent gig, top rate, bottom line was opt out or no-go you'd still say no?

[psychocandy]

Interesting!

Pimp phoned me early today about a role they spoke to me last week about. Pimp works for a large agency but the end client is someone I've never heard of. Turns out they are a smallish company. Hmmm.

So agent says he's sending usual stuff through including the opt out declaration. I say Im opting in for this one thanks. Agent asks why? I state my reasons. Oh, er, I dont know if we can. Why not? Because we havent a single contractor working who is opted in

Anyways, I say Im opting in and later, bigger pimp from same agency phones. Why do you want to opt in? Me, do I have to give a reason? No, says bigger pimp. There you go then, I said.

OK, we'll see if the client will take opted in contractor as they may not want an employee(!). Eh? Opting in doesnt affect the client in any way shape or form I said.

They havent phoned back or sent an opted in declaration. D'ya reckon I've been passed over?

Good on you for this. This is just putting off agent bulltulip. But as per previous post what are you going to do if they play hardball and say no opt out no gig?

[psychocandy]

I think one of the issues is the government like doing things by phone and snail mail, and people in IT prefer doing things by email.

I also suspect the email box is unattended as when I contacted the EAS by email a few years ago my email was ignored, however when I used the phone they actually acted - so the agency got a kick up the behind and I didn't lose the gig.

Phone number for all those interested - 0800 917 2368 (Yes it is the same number as the Agency Workers Pay helpline, and you have to give your name and contact details. )

Thats one of my pet hates - companies who issue email addresses and dont answer emails. Whats the point?

I'd prefer to email someone than phone them. Likewise, I prefer if someone emails me rather than phones. If they phone I have to speak to them then, if they email I can deal with it in the next few hours.

What pisses me off is people who don't answer emails/take days to do so. Good thing is my accountant at NW answers emails same day which is excellent - I've never actually spoken to him!

[Wanderer]

The Regulations are a complete dogs dinner. It is typical of a government that doesn't understand the flexible labour force. The intentions (as I recall) were good, to protect vulnerable workers, the only people who genuinely benefit are the lawyers.

No, the only people who genuinely benefit are the agents!

[BolshieBastard]

No, the only people who genuinely benefit are the agents!

Agency still hasnt phoned me back. Im wondering whether to phone them up and use some of my minutes just to ask them some awkward questions

[BolshieBastard]

Good on you for this. This is just putting off agent bulltulip. But as per previous post what are you going to do if they play hardball and say no opt out no gig?

TBH, the location for the role isnt ideal and I've potentially another, better rate role on the go so, Im not too bothered if they do turn round and say that.

Thinking of giving them a ring and asking what is what (if they take the call).

[Andy Hallett]

No, the only people who genuinely benefit are the agents!

You have the PCG to thank for the opt out.

Still, contractors want to show they are independent commercial businesses taking risk seeking to hide behind Employment Agency Regulations does seem a bit weird to me.

It would be lovely if we were guarenteed payments irrespective of quality by our customers

[BolshieBastard]

Yes, agreed to some extent. But I also agree more with NLUKs standpoint... sad I know :-)

OK. £100 a day is £100 a day. Being opted out is possibly a bit of hassle for you but, in 99% of case, won't make a difference to you - £100 a day will make a difference so its two different things to fight for.

All well and good to say you need to fight for but its easy to say when you're the other person and its not your contract. Like NLUK said, how far do you push it?

Or are you telling me if it came down to it, excellent gig, top rate, bottom line was opt out or no-go you'd still say no?

Im not being funny mate but, after 15+ years of contracting, I can afford to pick and choose my contracts.

The location for this one is about 60 mile away but is not the easiet to get to. That and I'd never heard of the end client (who the agent admitted was 'small') made me decide opt in was best.

Im not really that arsed about opt in \ out generally. Im more concerned with the size of the client and potentially issues getting money out of them. Yes, you can have issues getting money out of large clients but not as a rule.

Would I hang out for opt in on the perfect role \ rate? No, deffo not unless the client was small or one I'd never heard of. There's no point having the perfect role \ rate if you end up not getting paid.

[Wanderer]

You have the PCG to thank for the opt out.

Indeed. I think it was a massive own goal by the PCG but they didn't foresee that it would be so widely abused by agencies.

Still, contractors want to show they are independent commercial businesses taking risk seeking to hide behind Employment Agency Regulations does seem a bit weird to me.

A single unpaid invoice could easy bankrupt one of our companies. We are just humble business people seeking to protect our company income.

What's SThree's policy on the opt out then? Is it to allow them to choose opt in/out or do you only accept opted out contractors?

[Andy Hallett]

Opt out of Conduct of employment agencies 2003 act?

What's SThree's policy on the opt out then? Is it to allow them to choose opt in/out or do you only accept opted out contractors?

It's fairly simple, if you want to Opt Out you can, if you don't want to we won't force you. There are some clients who insist on only receiving applications from opt-out contractors but they are a tiny fraction of the client base.

In reality the status makes very little difference to us for the 99.9% of UK contracts that run smoothly. You may be surprised to know that it is more of a pain NOT to pay when running a fully electronic worksheet system going into our SAP system.

I can't say it will stay like this forever as we need to stay in line with the market, but our opt-out contracts have never had a 'pay when paid' clauses for opt out contractors. Perhaps as we are more used to dealing internationally where protection for freelancers and contractors via management companies is a lot higher.