Slaves

[amcdonald]

Why not just strike out the clause, then sign it and send it back

[DodgyAgent]

Why should I be under obligation to provide the service for a fixed period of time, while the client can terminate the service at a weeks notice?

I will first of all accept that you have every right to negotiate whatever contractual terms you wish. When it comes to reciprocal notice clauses I do not understand why so many contractors have this "tit for tat" attitude problem. OK 7 days notice for the client is hardly inspiring for any contractor, and may well cause the client problems with getting good contractors in the first place. However since when did businesses and suppliers ever have to have exactly even contracts? If you want your builder to complete a job he contracts to do so. He does not have a notice clause to clear off whenever it suits him.

If I employ a company to provide me with IT support services for 3 months I do not expect to have to give them a notice clause that enables them to cut short their service. I do on the other hand want to be able to chuck them out if they are s***.

[AtW]

in other words

> I do not expect to have to give them a notice clause that
> enables them to cut short their service. I do on the other hand
> want to be able to chuck them out if they are s***.

So in other words the truth of the matter is that the side with the money will have upper hand in negotiations and I doubt big companies are even keen to "negotiate" terms of the contracts they offer.

My view is that contracts should be even -- perhaps there is a need for a law stating simply that terms like that can't be uneven.

[Insight14]

Re: in other words

Dodgy, I don't think any contractor would object to clauses for non-performance. If a supplied service is substandard I don't see anything wrong with termination or penalty clauses.

However, we all know that contracts can be terminated for a lot of reasons, such as the client running over-budget, or finding an internal resource. Why should I commit 6 months worth of a very limited resource (me) to a company without the same level of commitment from them?

Unfortunately it was a deal breaker on both sides, so no contracts were signed.

[DodgyAgent]

Re: in other words

My view

:rollin

[BigJohnE]

Re: in other words

There is the "Unfair Terms and Conditions" Act 2001

There is much weight on the contractors side with this law in particular when agents apply their "standard terms and conditions" ie: when they give no room to negotiate and insist that the weaker parter accepts unfair conditions favour one side only.


Unfair Terms in Computer Contracts

[shaunbhoy]

Re: in other words

when agents apply there "standard terms and conditions"

their
:rolleyes

[AtW]

views

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>My view

<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->

:rollin [/quote]

You are only one step above slave trader Dodgy :rolleyes

[DodgyAgent]

Re: in other words

Why should I commit 6 months worth of a very limited resource (me) to a company without the same level of commitment from them?

You should do whatever you think is best for you. I just do not understand this obsession with identical reciprocal arrangements. It depends on what you view your role is. Are you simply filling in for a permie or are you supplying a service. If the latter you may like to ask yourself exactly what service you are giving. My opinion is that clients buy services from providers partly to give them security that the service they are buying is there for the period of time that they require.
In addition they are also paying for flexibility to terminate that service as and when they wish.

Whilst negotiating both parties need to take these considerations into account when working out mutually acceptable TOB. In your case the client was not giving you the incentive to take his contract.. fine. But why this obsession with tit for tat communistesque b*******?

[DodgyAgent]

Re: views

You are only one step above slave trader Dodgy

above?????