Two Weeks Probation

[BS1397]

Hi,

I wonder if anybody had this clause forced on them during an interview? But I was told the client insists on a two weeks probationary period during which the contractor must agree to work unpaid if his contract is terminated within the first two weeks because the client thinks the work is not to their satisfaction, and who's to say they won't pull a fast one or simply underestimate the workload yet expect the contractor to meet unrealistic targets?

Whilst I don't think I will have a problem, I feel very uneasy that potentially I could work for free just to be dismissed without any reason given or have a recourse if the dismissal is unfair or because the client's expectations were unreasonable. Also there is an element of accounting implications involved like VAT, but this is something the accountant will have to clarify.

Has anyone had any experience of this? And isn't two weeks is just too long considering the manager should have a good idea of competency in the first 2 or 3 days? I should mention that this is a post migration support role which it does not involve any scripting or coding, just vanilla support.

PS; If I pass the probationary period then all the money will be released on the third week onwards.

Thanks for any feedback.

[cojak]

I have never had that kind of clause, but then again I would never be forced into one, because I would end the interview there and then the moment it was mentioned.

What's the betting that they only have 2 weeks worth of work for you to do?

[Wanderer]

Whilst I don't think I will have a problem, I feel very uneasy that potentially I could work for free just to be dismissed without any reason given or have a recourse if the dismissal is unfair or because the client's expectations were unreasonable.

Yes, that could very well happen. If they tried to pull that one on me they would need a very good justification not to pay me for work done and I would fight them very hard. Make sure you have all the job specs in writing up front and you know you can perform against them. Ask the client for feedback after the first and second week (by email or if verbally then make notes of what was said). Make it clear to them that they must raise any performance issues with you immediately so that they can be dealt with, not wait till the end of two weeks and then say "Nah, didn't like you goodbye".

Also there is an element of accounting implications involved like VAT, but this is something the accountant will have to clarify.

Look up the VAT treatment of bad debts or debts which are written off. I think you can claim them back against VAT so they won't add insult to injury but ask your accountant.

[dynamicsaxcontractor]

Hi,

I wonder if anybody had this clause forced on them during an interview? But I was told the client insists on a two weeks probationary period during which the contractor must agree to work unpaid if his contract is terminated within the first two weeks because the client thinks the work is not to their satisfaction, and who's to say they won't pull a fast one or simply underestimate the workload yet expect the contractor to meet unrealistic targets?

Whilst I don't think I will have a problem, I feel very uneasy that potentially I could work for free just to be dismissed without any reason given or have a recourse if the dismissal is unfair or because the client's expectations were unreasonable. Also there is an element of accounting implications involved like VAT, but this is something the accountant will have to clarify.

Has anyone had any experience of this? And isn't two weeks is just too long considering the manager should have a good idea of competency in the first 2 or 3 days? I should mention that this is a post migration support role which it does not involve any scripting or coding, just vanilla support.

PS; If I pass the probationary period then all the money will be released on the third week onwards.

Thanks for any feedback.

I would never agree to that, what is saying they only have 10 days worth of work and are trying to get it done for free? On the other hand its quite common that you get a clause in the contract that you have no notice period for the first week or two and only get it from week 3.

[MarillionFan]

I have never had that kind of clause, but then again I would never be forced into one, because I would end the interview there and then the moment it was mentioned.

What's the betting that they only have 2 weeks worth of work for you to do?

WSS

I've ended interviews mid-way when it's been blatantly obvious it's a mis-match or they have been adamant on something I didn't agree with.

If they've hired crap people before then they should work on their interview process.

[northernladuk]

You became a contractor because you wanted the flexibility and to be your own boss. Start being one. If you don't like it tell them to do one, put your terms on the table, they want you after all. Stand up for yourself a make some decisions on what YOU want to do. Time to man up.

If you like it, take it. If you don't, negotiate until it does suit you. It's your business.

[RasputinDude]

A recruitment agency that rhymes with 'Regressive' and is a member of the S3 group tried this on with me so I told them to stuff it.

I suspect that the agent will still invoice the client for your time even if after two weeks they get rid of you. Nice result for the agent.

[eek]

From the moment I walk in the door to the moment I leave I bill

No more, more less and if you don't like it find someone else.

[borderreiver]

Hi,

I wonder if anybody had this clause forced on them during an interview? But I was told the client insists on a two weeks probationary period during which the contractor must agree to work unpaid if his contract is terminated within the first two weeks because the client thinks the work is not to their satisfaction, and who's to say they won't pull a fast one or simply underestimate the workload yet expect the contractor to meet unrealistic targets?
h it does not involve any scripting or coding, just vanilla support.

You are a business, so in the normal scheme of things they can withhold payment anyway if your performance is unsatisfactory. They just have to be prepared to argue it in a court if necessary.

Having a clause like this in the contract just demonstrates they want 10 days' free work out of you IMO.

Of course, it could be that they got burned once in the past by some rogue contractor and are just trying to cover themselves, but I doubt it!

[Gentile]

Hi,

I wonder if anybody had this clause forced on them during an interview? But I was told the client insists on a two weeks probationary period during which the contractor must agree to work unpaid if his contract is terminated within the first two weeks because the client thinks the work is not to their satisfaction, and who's to say they won't pull a fast one or simply underestimate the workload yet expect the contractor to meet unrealistic targets?

Whilst I don't think I will have a problem, I feel very uneasy that potentially I could work for free just to be dismissed without any reason given or have a recourse if the dismissal is unfair or because the client's expectations were unreasonable. Also there is an element of accounting implications involved like VAT, but this is something the accountant will have to clarify.

Has anyone had any experience of this? And isn't two weeks is just too long considering the manager should have a good idea of competency in the first 2 or 3 days? I should mention that this is a post migration support role which it does not involve any scripting or coding, just vanilla support.

PS; If I pass the probationary period then all the money will be released on the third week onwards.

Thanks for any feedback.

To be honest, that clause is such a red flag that I wouldn't consider working with any agency or client that suggested it, even if they were to back-peddle furiously after belatedly realising they'd pushed me too far. There are certain ways you don't do business. This is one of them.