Who do I ask for a rise: Client or Agent?

[stek]

Getting a 'rise' is easy, just pay yourself more salary or increase your dividend.

[SuPaStA]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the 425 rate you saw on the email is what your client would be paying the agency, the 2 contractors would be getting less than that after the agency takes their cut.

[psychocandy]

Hmmm - bringing in two people at the same rate as the OP doesn't really indicate that they are focussing on cost.

But bringing in people at existing rate, probably means he aint gonna pay extra for someone already there because he knows he can get people in.

Also, it does happen, once people know they can get offshored staff in for a low rate as they see it, then occasionally cost becomes the most important driver.

[Batcher]

I never talk rates with the client. I may mention that I'll be looking for a raise when it comes to renewal time but that is for me and the agency to talk about initially.

I try not to worry about the rate that other contractors around me are on. As long as I'm happy with the rate I've negotiated then that's all that matter to me.

[TheFaQQer]

Firstly these newbies must be permie with their company (not on a good pay).

And the basis for such a sweeping statement is...?

Try to find out what company they work for. If they do work for another company and are not independent contractors then you are in trouble.

Wait a moment - I thought that they "must be permie"?

[TheFaQQer]

But bringing in people at existing rate, probably means he aint gonna pay extra for someone already there because he knows he can get people in.

Also, it does happen, once people know they can get offshored staff in for a low rate as they see it, then occasionally cost becomes the most important driver.

If the client is bringing people in at the same rate, then that indicates that might be the market rate for those skills.

Did the original post specify where the new resources are based, or just their nationality?

[texto]

And the basis for such a sweeping statement is...?


Wait a moment - I thought that they "must be permie"?

If I substituted "must" with "could", would that satisfy you? The OP referred to them as "Indians" and not "British of Indian origin". Most Indians come here on a work permit employed by their Indian employer. They provide managed services. I can name a few of them if you want. I've worked alongside them for a long time.

[TheFaQQer]

If I substituted "must" with "could", would that satisfy you?

Well, there is a vast difference between stating that they "must" be permie and they "could be" permie. If you meant "they could be permies", then you are right, they could be. If however, you meant that they must be permies, then unless you are party to information not disclosed in the thread, then it is a ridiculous statement.

[lukemg]

Steady all - this isn't general....
In between all the pedantry there is some good advice here.
In my experience, client will never give you a big rise from current rate unless you have changed the world and can change it back if they don't.
Chief among the reasons for this is the queue of other contractors/agents turning up with the same demands (it ALWAYS gets out) - see JL list for MP's, one gets a massive telly, they all want one.
So - If you cant stomach existing rate + maybe 10% more, you will have to walk I reckon.
I would be very tempted not to hold current client to ransom and try to leave on good terms, some reason why you cant travel for a while means its not your fault etc.
It's obvious but always negotiate hard on the way in, there are limited options after this point.