Rogue Agent

[eek]

You seriously need to grow some kahuna's and see the bigger picture rather than trying to pick on tiny bits of information without understanding what you are talking about!!

You highlight the last line without reading the sentence before it that says failure to give a reference without any explaination. He has given you one, it isn't their policy.

That is actually irrelevent here as he should be able to provide a set of dates. The standard reference I always sent people was

Tulip limited employed Fred Bloggs between xxxx and yyyy.

Company policy prevents us from providing information beyond employment start and end dates.

The real problem here is that the agent does not employ a contractor. He contracts a (fictional) company for services which may or may not be provided by Fred Bloggs. If the agent wants to be 100% truthful the letter would read

Agency limited contracted Tulip limited to provide unspecified services to a confidential client between xxxx and yyyy. (if the contract had a right to substitution you would also have to add) These services may or may not have been provided by Mr tulip contractor.

The answer to the question here is that the only person who could confirm you worked at client company x between date a and date b is someone who still works at client company x. Legally the agent can't really confirm anything as they aren't party to what happened beyond the fact that a company provided services and the client has accepted and paid for those services.

[craig1]

If you need to prove you worked there then a copy of your signed contract plus a copy of a paid invoice (preferably with remittance note) should achieve that goal. If they get really picky then you could point an invoice towards payment on a bank statement.

In a B2B relationship, the only people who can demand proof of contract particulars or working relationship (without a court order) are HMRC in any of their various guises.

[JamJarST]

That is actually irrelevent here as he should be able to provide a set of dates. The standard reference I always sent people was

Yes he could but he is under no obligation to do so and failure to do so is neither illegal or negligent no matter waht the OP thinks.

[eek]

Yes he could but he is under no obligation to do so and failure to do so is neither illegal or negligent no matter waht the OP thinks.

Under employment law not saying anything is not a good thing (it may result in discrimination with consequences). What I wrote above is based on the advice of two employment lawyers who advised me that saying anything more or anything less could result in serious consequences.

However, did you intentionally miss the second half of my comment where I pointed out that because he's a contractor any statement from the agent is really totally worthless as the legal relationships involved in the relationship destroy any direct relationship between fred bloggs, agent company and client company and means that the agent can (for a very good reason) avoid saying anything.

[JamJarST]

Under employment law not saying anything is not a good thing (it may result in discrimination with consequences). What I wrote above is based on the advice of two employment lawyers who advised me that saying anything more or anything less could result in serious consequences.

However, did you intentionally miss the second half of my comment where I pointed out that because he's a contractor any statement from the agent is really totally worthless as the legal relationships involved in the relationship destroy any direct relationship between fred bloggs, agent company and client company and means that the agent can (for a very good reason) avoid saying anything.

I was merely pointing out that it was neither illegal or negligent, whether it opens him up to civil liability is a different matter. The fact that the company policy is to not provide any details for anyone, may well avoid any liability.

As to your seconf point, I was in full agreement with you so din't comment.

[eek]

I was merely pointing out that it was neither illegal or negligent, whether it opens him up to civil liability is a different matter. The fact that the company policy is to not provide any details for anyone, may well avoid any liability.

As to your seconf point, I was in full agreement with you so din't comment.

I believe there are circumstances (within schools, social work and other similar industries) where that is not the case although I don't think it would be illegal just negligent (with resulting personal criminal consequences). That scenario probably doesn't impact an IT contractor but that is not the case absolutely everywhere else.

[SueEllen]

I believe there are circumstances (within schools, social work and other similar industries) where that is not the case although I don't think it would be illegal just negligent (with resulting personal criminal consequences). That scenario probably doesn't impact an IT contractor but that is not the case absolutely everywhere else.

There are which is what I stated in my post. In some industries it's custom and practise to give a reference and a detailed one at that.

In those cases you have to write a reference even if the worker was awful. And as you open yourself up for prosecution if you write a bad one from the worker then you omit details if they were bad.

If you refuse to give one at all you open yourself up for prosecution. The only way you can get around it is if the worker did something they should have been prosecuted for which only has implications for your company but you decided not to prosecute them.

[pootle]

Update - the client would not accept a reference from the line manager as the manager was not "employed by the agent". What a farce - since found out that the agent has not provided any reference for last 3 contracts - obviously contract has been deleted from CV. On a good note, the client's compliance dept overlooked a stupid short term contract. As a warning, avoid PDY Consulting who are based in Chelmsford Essex. Thanks to you you all for some good advice - the dubious advice/comments

[northernladuk]

Update - the client would not accept a reference from the line manager as the manager was not "employed by the agent".

You are not employed by the agent or vice versa either???? Not quite understanding this bit.

[MarillionFan]

You are not employed by the agent or vice versa either???? Not quite understanding this bit.

I can count on two hands the number of times I've been asked for a reference in 35 contracts, and having 35 I can choose who I put down. Even with the powerchex I did last year they still just asked me for 3 referees which they phoned up and went through.

To be honest sounds like the client is a bit of an ass and that the OP doesn't seem to have the nouse to deal with either the agent or the client to get the job done. That in itself would set the alarm bells off concerning the candidate whether he/she could even do a contract without getting stuck on the 1st day.