Opt in Opt out

[malvolio]

so is it really worth a fight in the courts with a large corporate with the only winner being the lawyer? And we only have your interpretation of the law (which is a bit thin considering that you are not a lawyer yourself) .
Wouldnt your time be better spent grabbing hold of a speed gun, positioning yourself in a street on a main road in some poxy little village somewhere and citizen's arresting speeding motorists? At least the law is pretty clear and speeding motorists do present a threat to people?

And there was me thinking you are that rarest of beasts, a professional agent. Ho hum... I know one or two and you just failed to make the list.

You get paid regardless by a client that has no real idea of the market they are driving. I, however, have to deal with people who don't understand the requirement, the skill-set, the regulations, the security rules, the payment strategy and the various laws that drive my business, and who one way or another mean I cannot tender for work on a level playing field.

Fine. Yes, I am pissed off. So stop being all superior and try and think just what it is you do for a living.

[DodgyAgent]

And there was me thinking you are that rarest of beasts, a professional agent. Ho hum... I know one or two and you just failed to make the list.

You get paid regardless by a client that has no real idea of the market they are driving. I, however, have to deal with people who don't understand the requirement, the skill-set, the regulations, the security rules, the payment strategy and the various laws that drive my business, and who one way or another mean I cannot tender for work on a level playing field.

Fine. Yes, I am pissed off. So stop being all superior and try and think just what it is you do for a living.

Malvolio I bow to your moral integrity. I am a humble agent who has clearly displeased you. However it does appear thet you are quite closely associated with a number of agencies who themselves employ dubious tactics. One of which persists in the practice of "blocking" contractors. In other words they tell contractors that they are being put forward when they only intend that the contractor should not be put forward by one of their competitor agencies. They themselves being restricted to two Cvs per job when confronted by other CVs of even better contractors than the ones that they have already processed deal with the problem accordingly.

There is no one better at practising the dark arts of agency tricks than you malvolio. I bow to your greatness.

[the guy with the bowtie]

... audience hush as they await response ....

[malvolio]

I know all the tricks. I also know most of the business reasons behind them. The end result is that the freelance market is geared up to providing the worst product under the worst conditions for the greatest margin, which means that neither the end client nor the supplier are getting the best result. However the middlemen are making money quite happily without having to do any of the things they promise their clients they are doing, while disregarding both good practice and core legislation. And for every decent agency (and there are quite a few) there are 20 cowboys - and even the good agencies are using people who would be better suited to selling used cars than business-critical skills and most of whom have absolutely no idea about their own product.

Then you wonder why us 'umble workers get frustrated with the cavalier way many agents approach their work.

Then you might further understand why I get really hacked off when the one organisation that could actually make a difference is focused on improving the quality of the freelance without doing anything about the quality of the market through which they have to work.

Then again, it's not been a good week...

[Mailman]

So why the feck are you giving advice about contracting topics, dunce?

Because I can

Mailman

[Mailman]

so is it really worth a fight in the courts with a large corporate with the only winner being the lawyer?

Yes, because if enough people take legal action this practice will get stamped out.

Actually, you can usually tell just how poor a certain business sector is by whether the Government has passed legislation controlling how they operate.

Obviously real estate agents arent nearly as dodgy as employment agents

Mailman

[Denny]

I know all the tricks. I also know most of the business reasons behind them. The end result is that the freelance market is geared up to providing the worst product under the worst conditions for the greatest margin, which means that neither the end client nor the supplier are getting the best result. However the middlemen are making money quite happily without having to do any of the things they promise their clients they are doing, while disregarding both good practice and core legislation. And for every decent agency (and there are quite a few) there are 20 cowboys - and even the good agencies are using people who would be better suited to selling used cars than business-critical skills and most of whom have absolutely no idea about their own product.

Then you wonder why us 'umble workers get frustrated with the cavalier way many agents approach their work.

Then you might further understand why I get really hacked off when the one organisation that could actually make a difference is focused on improving the quality of the freelance without doing anything about the quality of the market through which they have to work.

Then again, it's not been a good week...

To be even more cynical, I often think that the client's don't want the best contractors either which is why the agency rogue model who blocks conractors often suits them too.

They want someone competent enough to do the job when it suits, but also someone they can easily scapegoat for problems and mistakes and someone who is cheaper. Also, the cheapest and usually perceived as the one's most desparate to keep their contracts and therefore more vulnerable to being pushed around and taken advantage of.

By taking on the best, they are taking on the most expensive, the most likely to move on without quibble about whether the bills can be met, the most competent who is capable of raising the standards bar and someone very capable of showing up the incompetency of most of their permie peers which leads the Project Manager's own superiors to wonder whether standards of PM are what they should be. What PM would want to risk all of that?