Leaving gig without notice

[psychocandy]

I would hope not to have left myself in a position where a contractor (company) was able to pull stunt like that in the first place.

If your buying in a body for general support work or sys admin, I would want to take someone on a fixed term without any termination or break clause on the contractor side.

If your buying for development or specific coding supply then as long as the handover was performed to our satisfaction and all his responsibilities were discharged as at the end of the notice period then yes, they would get paid.

If they were in for a specific project, again, I would look to take someone on a fixed term. Depending on the complexity of the delivery, and the uncertainty of timescales, there may be an opportunity to offer a break clause, but it would be subject to terms as above.

I appreciate people may want to leave contracts early for various reasons (I've done it a few times when I was contracting), but its a sign of unreliability. I certainly wouldnt offer such a person work again.

How can I expect to commit to supply my customers without adequate safeguards?

True enough. But you seem to imply that the contractor wouldnt have a break clause but you would? Hmmm. Seems a bit one-sided. So you dont want them to let you down (fair enough) but you want to be able to cut them short if you;re circumstances change?

[Pondlife]

True enough. But you seem to imply that the contractor wouldnt have a break clause but you would? Hmmm. Seems a bit one-sided. So you dont want them to let you down (fair enough) but you want to be able to cut them short if you;re circumstances change?

He who pays the piper, picks the tune unfortunately.

[rd409]

I would hope not to have left myself in a position where a contractor (company) was able to pull stunt like that in the first place.

If your buying in a body for general support work or sys admin, I would want to take someone on a fixed term without any termination or break clause on the contractor side.

If your buying for development or specific coding supply then as long as the handover was performed to our satisfaction and all his responsibilities were discharged as at the end of the notice period then yes, they would get paid.

If they were in for a specific project, again, I would look to take someone on a fixed term. Depending on the complexity of the delivery, and the uncertainty of timescales, there may be an opportunity to offer a break clause, but it would be subject to terms as above.

I appreciate people may want to leave contracts early for various reasons (I've done it a few times when I was contracting), but its a sign of unreliability. I certainly wouldnt offer such a person work again.

How can I expect to commit to supply my customers without adequate safeguards?

A contractor, in my view, should show an exceptional level of commitment. Its one of the things that differentiate them/their company from a permie.

This whole break clause/early termination is something that is usually put in place by the agencies to cover their exposure im sure. Certainly doesn't help the end client.

There are two types of contracts as per my understanding. One that pays for time you provide your services, and the other which pays for the deliverables. If your contract is to pay for the time, then I would expect the client to pay up for the time I have provided my services. It would be unprofessional to leave a project mid-way, but then, my contract does not cover the bigger picture, so if the client refuses to pay up, I would chase up using all my resources. On the other hand, a contract that pays for deliverables depends on deliverables and usually carries a lot more financial rewards for the additional risks such as not getting paid for incomplete or unacceptable deliverables.

According to what OP has written, the contract is a time based payment, so the end client has to pay up for the final invoice IMHO. If the contract says anything about recovering loss due to contractor action, it is a different situation altogether. But according to me, if there is a termination clause, MOO and RTS, then contractor or client can use it to maximise their profits. It may not be professional, but it is not illegal.

Leaving contract early is not a sign of unreliability or non-commitment. A business makes money for taking risks. Your commitments to your end clients is your risk. You cannot blame contractors leaving early as the reason of failure to deliver. All the projects has a safegaurd against such events. If you fail to deliver a project in time, it is not because a contractor left midway, but because you could not find suitable replacement in time.

And finally how do you determine if a contractor has ditched a contract half way? If I leave a 6 monther after 2 months, I can very well say to my next clients that it was only for 2 months. You may burn some bridges, but that is all you lose. I would never sign a contract that has termination clause only for the end client. Either the contract has a termination clause, or it doesn't. End of.

[craig1]

Leaving contract early is not a sign of unreliability or non-commitment. A business makes money for taking risks. Your commitments to your end clients is your risk. You cannot blame contractors leaving early as the reason of failure to deliver. All the projects has a safegaurd against such events. If you fail to deliver a project in time, it is not because a contractor left midway, but because you could not find suitable replacement in time.

I disagree. Walking out on a contract without good cause is highly unprofessional. If you've agreed to a notice period and refuse to honour it just so you can jump to another contract then that's unprofessional. The only time it's not unprofessional is if the client has done something materially significant that warrants you withdrawing your labour or the agency stops paying you.

[JamJarST]

Leaving contract early is not a sign of unreliability or non-commitment. A business makes money for taking risks. Your commitments to your end clients is your risk. You cannot blame contractors leaving early as the reason of failure to deliver. All the projects has a safegaurd against such events. If you fail to deliver a project in time, it is not because a contractor left midway, but because you could not find suitable replacement in time.

But this is not about leaving early, this is about breaching a specific term of the contract by leaving immediately and not honuring a notice period. I have a notice period of 2 weeks on a 3 month contract (it is actually a monthly contract but clientco is talking about making it 3 months). If i left after two months it might be considered unprofessional, but as long as I geve the two weeks notice it would not be a breach of the contract.

[BlasterBates]

Unprofessional - I agree completely.
Illegal - I beg to differ.

As I have earlier said, I do not condone this behaviour, but I do support that the contractor needs to get paid. Not paying for half finished task is okay. But refusing to sign off final invoice to me is over rated. My suggestions were only for the OP and not his friend. If the OP wants to terminate the contract, then he can serve a notice and expect to get paid. His friend has just committed professional suicide so no sympathy for him.

I hope I have cleared myself.

Well the fact as to whether one may or not condone not paying the invoice is not what is being discussed. The point is, do you have a legal entitlement to be paid. The answer is not necessarily, for example in bankruptcy or after a breach of contract. The client has a perfectly legal right to withold payment. Why should he pay the invoice in full and go through the hassle of sueing the contractor, when he has a perfectly good argument for not paying and let the contractor have the hassle? If the contractor sues, which is an option, he can counteract by suing the contractor.

If you send an invoice and it isn't paid you go to court, the court then orders the company to pay or sends it into bankrupty. However if the client contests it then it ceases to be automatic. This is precisely what would occur and why client is withholding, because he can easily contest the claim.

This is not a question as to what contractors collectively feel about something, but a question of whether the client has the legal right to withold payment. In this particular case he does.

The contractor has the right to contest that.

[minsky1]

But this is not about leaving early, this is about breaching a specific term of the contract by leaving immediately and not honuring a notice period. I have a notice period of 2 weeks on a 3 month contract (it is actually a monthly contract but clientco is talking about making it 3 months). If i left after two months it might be considered unprofessional, but as long as I geve the two weeks notice it would not be a breach of the contract.

As PondLife says, its a buyers market.

As a hirer, I would be looking to minimise my risk. Contracts I get drawn up seek to reflect this. If the contractor signs, he gets the gig. He doesn't have to accept my terms, he can walk. The most disheartening thing however is when people do sign clearly not having read or understood the terms, then default. Hazard of the game I know, but it happens all the time.

[perplexed]

I personally haven't walked from a gig.

I should have once, when agency started misbehaving. I didn't, stupidly didn't want to lat a client down. Cost me a fair whack.

Would I quit purely for more money? No.

Would I quit if the client were being dicks, taking the piss? Hell yes.

Would I quit if the agent started taking the piss? Definitely.

There's no black / white here. There's an ideal - that you honour contract, definitely. There are very valid situations where a contractor should get out of dodge pronto.

[rd409]

I think I am being misunderstood here. Let me split my opinion on this one into different statements.

1) Contractor leaving early without notice - Unprofessional. Gives rest of the clan a bad name. I would not comment on his/her commitment without knowing the exact reasons why s/he ditched the contract like that. I have had mates, who served notice to client, and in return they were walked out of the premises without getting paid for notice period, and I am not talking about financial sectors or high risk clients where this is done as a security. They were just walked out because the manager didnt like someone serving them a notice. These guys now, have never stayed for notice period at any of their gigs. They prepare the handover document - submit it with their notice and walk off if they want to leave before the end of the contract.

2) Contractor leaving early with notice - Best way to end a relation that is not going anywhere. But again it depends on the specific situation whether premature ending of a contract is good or not.

3) Contractor waits till the end of contract, and refuses to extend - Well within his/her rights.

So as I have earlier said, I do not say that OP's friend did a good thing, and I do not suggest that OP follows the suit. I just gave him an option if his contract permits him to follow that route. OP has a duty to make decisions that are good for his company, so if there is a new gig coming up with better prospects he has every right to terminate the existing contract if he feels that is the right thing to do.

Finally, this is precisely the reason, I personally do not entertain any agents or look at the job boards between the gigs. The first time I look at the market is 1 month before the end of contract.

[sasguru]

My tuppence: as a hirer of contractors (and ex contractor myself) I usually specify a 2 week notice period. I can't see any circumstances bar physical assault, sudden serious illness or something equally dramatic and unlikely) that I would condone as being suffiicient for a contractor to leave without notice. 2 weeks is not a large period of time and there can be no excuse for breaching contract.
Were a contractor to behave in such an unprofessional way I would certainy try to withold payment (and get the in-house lawyer involved) and in a niche industry such behaviour would certainly have repercussions.