two contracts in hand. Suggestions pls

[Boo]

I am anticipating two contract offers. For one, I havn't signed any agreement, but have agreed for the contract over phone with the agency, work order and other paper work is under process.
Second one I gave a telephonic and have been asked to come for face to face interview.

I am more interested in the second contract which is a development project. The first one being support job (bug fixing). I am confident that I will secure the second contract after the interview, in which case I am in a awkward situation to say no to the first agency where I agreed (not in writing though). Appreciate any suggestions here.

What's uneasy about this for me is the fact that the first contract is with the same employee for whom I finished contracting about 3 months ago. So if I say no now (after initially agreeing), I might be shortlisted in their black list for any future opportunities.

You don't say when the interview for the second job is going to take place ? If it is in the next week and you are confident of a quick turnaround then you can fairly easily string the first agency along just by saying things like the contracts haven't arrived yet / they are in IR35 review / off to the acountant for a second opinoin etc etc etc.

Then, if you get the second job you can either tell the first agency you have decided to take another role (if you can face their consequent hissy fit) or else make a demand for contract alterations that you know will be unacceptable to them (like a big pay rise over what has been agreed / ask them for a clause indemnifying you for any legal fees if a dispute arises / etc etc - use your imagination). Or you can just do what the agencies do when the situation is reversed and they have a preferred candidate but want to keep you as a second string : don't answer calls and generally delay, obfuscate and shilly-shally until they give up.

As for the client putting you on a black list, they might do but then it is fairly unlikely that your availability slots will coincide with their demand slots in any case so meh ?

Boo

[Boo]

I have not seen you post a single constructive or useful thing yet. All you have done is waste your time firing another one liner shot at other posters.

PKB.

Boo

[raphal]

If the opt out wasn't done properly then this restriction is invalid.

What do you mean by opt out was done properly. I have searched this forum for discussions on opt out.

A quote from you in this thread is as below:

There is some debate about when the opt out needs to be done. What the legislation says is that the opt out must be done "before the introduction or supply" of the worker. Lots of people say that they take this to mean that opt out is not valid unless it's done before the introduction but it could also be argued that the opt out is valid if it's done after the introduction but before the supply (eg, before you start working). It's a grey area and as far as I know it's never been tested in court.

In my case the contract document itself had a clause saying I am opting opt out. So that opt out is invalid then. ?

[Boo]

What do you mean by opt out was done properly. I have searched this forum for discussions on opt out.

A quote from you in this thread is as below:

There is some debate about when the opt out needs to be done. What the legislation says is that the opt out must be done "before the introduction or supply" of the worker. Lots of people say that they take this to mean that opt out is not valid unless it's done before the introduction but it could also be argued that the opt out is valid if it's done after the introduction but before the supply (eg, before you start working). It's a grey area and as far as I know it's never been tested in court.

Introduction is supply.

The word introduction in the context of the regs means the point in time that the worker is introduced into the work force. Supply means the point in time that the supply of services commences. These are the same thing in contractual terms because it is at that point that the contract is instantiated as a legal entity.

The reason there is some uncertainty about this on contractor forums is that the PCG scored such a massive own goal with the agency regs opt-out that they needed to spread uncertainty as a fig leaf for their embarassment. But if you ask any solicitor their opinion as to the wording of the regs they will tell you the same thing that I have done.

Boo

[northernladuk]

Introduction is supply.

The word introduction in the context of the regs means the point in time that the worker is introduced into the work force. Supply means the point in time that the supply of services commences. These are the same thing in contractual terms because it is at that point that the contract is instantiated as a legal entity.

The reason there is some uncertainty about this on contractor forums is that the PCG scored such a massive own goal with the agency regs opt-out that they needed to spread uncertainty as a fig leaf for their embarassment. But if you ask any solicitor their opinion as to the wording of the regs they will tell you the same thing that I have done.

Boo

Erm, isn't introduction interview time so no contract?

I was under the impression that introduction is when the two first meet at interview. The supply option is there in case the contractor and client already know each other?

[TheFaQQer]

Erm, isn't introduction interview time so no contract?

I was under the impression that introduction is when the two first meet at interview. The supply option is there in case the contractor and client already know each other?

Introduction is the point at which the client could identify you as an individual.

[Antman]

Needs a court case to decide definitively.

[northernladuk]

Introduction is the point at which the client could identify you as an individual.

So even earlier than interview. Makes sense.

[Boo]

Erm, isn't introduction interview time so no contract?

I was under the impression that introduction is when the two first meet at interview. The supply option is there in case the contractor and client already know each other?

Introduction is the point at which the client could identify you as an individual.

No, introduction means introduction into the workforce, for the reason I gave in my post (now highlighted). As I said, it's the PCG who have spread the misinformation you have been given.

Boo

[Wanderer]

In my case the contract document itself had a clause saying I am opting opt out. So that opt out is invalid then. ?

It's a grey area because section 32(9) of the legislation is not clear. People have opinions about what it means as they have stated in this discussion but the fact is that we really won't know for sure until someone has tested it in court. This will most likely never happen because agencies would back down before it got to court and/or contractors wouldn't take it that far anyway.