Offered a move to permanent role - How do I deal with the agency

[DaveB]

To be honest if this is a longterm "dream" role, accept it and sort out the cr*p later. If you are going perm, there is no legitimate interest for the agency to protect. i.e. you're not "stealing" a contract, this is a perm job.

I don't really think this is a problem. If anything a problem between the agency and the client.

If possible let the current contract expire before signing the perm contract. I would try and do that so you can argue you were out of contract when you signed.

If this is a major client of the agency, they'll do nothing. They won't fight a client which makes them a lot of money.

This +1

If you legitimately finish the contract and then are offered a permanent role the Agency have much less leverage. Most of the handcuff clauses in contracts are open to challenge and if push comes to shove and the client wants you, the agency wont want to damage their relationship.

If you can, get something from the client to indemnify you if the agents kick off and then let them deal with it.

[DodgyAgent]

Most contracts have a clause that means you can't return to the client within 12 months of end of contract.

The agency cannot prevent you from working and 6 months of "lost margin" is about the most they can claim. Wording in the contract must state that they would charge NOT prevent the worker from working.

[DijStra]

This has been covered a number of times and basically depends on the client sweet talking the agency into accepting the change. Doing it by ignoring them is just going to cause a legal issues for both you and the end client where being upfront and providing potential inducements (say future contract work through them) may make it easier.

As for keeping the company it probably doesn't make much sense. Instead look at using an MVL to extract that war chest....

That what I thought though they are not an agency I have done work with and so I don't know how they might resolve this.

Can see mothballing co is of limited value thought it has sentimental value so I'd probably keep it anyway

I don't know what an MVL is but my war chest is already out of the company and in ISA's.

[BlasterBates]

Most contracts have a clause that means you can't return to the client within 12 months of end of contract.

But legally they can only be applied if the agency is protecting a legitimate interest.

i.e. you have a 3 month contract and then you switch agencies after 1 month. This is clearly in breach.

But for example if you work through your contract, and return to the same client in a different department, this wouldn't be enforcable, according to the "legal beagles".

i.e. they can't apply a carte blanche ban on working, whatever it might say in the contract.

I would say preventing you from going into a perm position would be probably also not be enforcable.

I think an agency would only chase up an obvious case of breach.

[DijStra]

To be honest if this is a longterm "dream" role, accept it and sort out the cr*p later. If you are going perm, there is no legitimate interest for the agency to protect. i.e. you're not "stealing" a contract, this is a perm job.

I don't really think this is a problem. If anything a problem between the agency and the client.

If possible let the current contract expire before signing the perm contract. I would try and do that so you can argue you were out of contract when you signed.

If this is a major client of the agency, they'll do nothing. They won't fight a client which makes them a lot of money.

Don't think there is anything as a dream role it just suits right now, location is excellent, money is good and I like working there. TBH I'd do it at less salary just for the wind down approach to retirement.

[vetran]

Did the Agent introduce you to the client?

What does your->Agency contract say?

what does the Client->Agency contract say?

Suity is that you?

have you asked a real expert (I think IPSE provide legal advice to Members).

[northernladuk]

I wouldn't assume to agent will always back down on the charge. It's all in the contract and above board and the agency has provided the service so it shouldn't be unreasonable for the client to pay. I think there is some wiggle room but the agent can't cave every single time this happens. It's an agreed part of the service.

[DijStra]

Did the Agent introduce you to the client?

What does your->Agency contract say?

what does the Client->Agency contract say?

Suity is that you?

have you asked a real expert (I think IPSE provide legal advice to Members).

My contract with agency is silent on matter. I just have a Purchase Order for my time which has been extended 5 times i.e 5 lots of 10 days. No t&c's on back or attached. I'm just invoicing against a PO. Normally I work directly with clients with no Agency so this is new for me.

Client -> agency I don't know.

I was approached about it this morning.

This is unusual for me as I'm normally engaged for 12-18 months plus at a time with a clear deliverable. I've never used the agency before but was at a loose end after my last contract was going to take a couple of months off and was contacted by a friend of a friend who needed someone to step in at short notice. This isn't what agency normally do as they are nuts and bolts HR bods. Interview by phone on Wednesday am started Thursday am based on me being licensed and able to start to cover off an investigation.

and who the F*** is suity?

[DijStra]

I wouldn't assume to agent will always back down on the charge. It's all in the contract and above board and the agency has provided the service so it shouldn't be unreasonable for the client to pay. I think there is some wiggle room but the agent can't cave every single time this happens. It's an agreed part of the service.

I think I'd prefer them to be above board with agency. For me I can accept once the PO runs out as I cannot see how I can be held responsible - whether it is ethical or not is a different matter. The client needs to sort this out with agency.

[WordIsBond]

It's hard to see any ethical problem here if there is no contract saying you can't do this. You work out what you agreed to do with the agency. It's done. You will then be providing a service to the client which, as you've described it, the agency probably couldn't provide in the long term. The client was always going to be looking for a permie for this role, it sounds like.

The only ethical problem is the client's re: the agency. If they want this to be kept from the agency, then they obviously think they have a problem. Do you want to work for them as a permie if they are going to behave unethically? It's one thing to contract for someone like that, you have a contract, you fulfill it, you move on. As a permie, you sort of want to trust the people you work with, and if they will rip off an agency, they might rip you off, too. I wouldn't do it, personally, if they won't sort it with the agency.

You can always tell them the agency is going to find out, so they'd be better just working it out with them. The agency case for compensation here is not very strong. It helps that you don't even have a contract with the agency. They can probably buy them off with a pittance, and then everything is above board and nobody has to worry about it.