This is my first post here so take it eazy on me people.
I am currently contracting in the city of London for the system development group of quite a big Exchange. My contract is through a consultancy firm who have employed me since March of 2003. Initially my contract was 6 months and I renewed in September 2003 with no problems. Coming up for the end of my second contract period I mentioned to the Consultancy's Relation manager for the Client site that I was looking for a rate increase at renewal. He mentioned that they were looking at increasing rates across the board for all the consultancy's resources onsite (There are a half a dozen full time consultancy workers that work here also). Once the negotiations had been sorted with the client then he would be in a position to discuss Rate increases. This occured 3 or 4 weeks before the contract expiry deadline. I did not hear anything more from the Consultancy about the rates or even if my Contract was going to be renewed by the client until, feeling apprehensive, I started pushing people to give me answers. Finally after much persistence, and a few sleepless nights, I was advised the day that my contract was expiring that the client did want to extend my contract for a further 6 months (I already knew this from talking with certain managers of the Client except I knew that it was for 12 months not 6). I also received the contract faxed through to me at work. When I received this I immediately noted that the rate was identical, the period was for 6 months and in addition to the standard terms and conditions there was also a clause relating to termination which stated that I would not be able to leave even with 30 days notice unless the Consultancy agreed. However the Consultancy could still get rid of me in 30 days and also if the Client did not need me the Consultance could get rid of me straight away by giving notice. This clause was a major change to what I had previously been on and when I questioned the contracts manager of the Agency (Who had been taken over in the new year by a large IT holding company) I was told that this is the standard contracts that they offer and there was nothing I could do about it. When I mentioned to them that I was not happy to sign they said I would not be able to work onsite without a contract even though I had meetings arranged for the next day. Eventually I suggested that they change the term to 1 month until the issues could be sorted out which they agreed to do. The one month extension is due to expire in a weeks time and I have been advised that I will be offered an 11 month contract plus be getting a rate increase and also that I would be now required to sign a form opting out of new legislation that makes it easier for Contractors to work directly for the Client rather than having to wait 6 months. The rate they offered was less than I wanted but I also discovered that the Consultancy was taking a 30 percent plus cut. The Client has a number of other contractors who are employed via an Agency and I believe if I was working through them the cut of my rate would be less and I would receive better support. My question is this should I approach the client to see if I can attach myself to one of the agencies when my contract comes up and if I attempt to do so is this new legislation effective in my case? If not by working for an agency rather than the client am I breeching the restraint of trade clause in my contract?
I am currently contracting in the city of London for the system development group of quite a big Exchange. My contract is through a consultancy firm who have employed me since March of 2003. Initially my contract was 6 months and I renewed in September 2003 with no problems. Coming up for the end of my second contract period I mentioned to the Consultancy's Relation manager for the Client site that I was looking for a rate increase at renewal. He mentioned that they were looking at increasing rates across the board for all the consultancy's resources onsite (There are a half a dozen full time consultancy workers that work here also). Once the negotiations had been sorted with the client then he would be in a position to discuss Rate increases. This occured 3 or 4 weeks before the contract expiry deadline. I did not hear anything more from the Consultancy about the rates or even if my Contract was going to be renewed by the client until, feeling apprehensive, I started pushing people to give me answers. Finally after much persistence, and a few sleepless nights, I was advised the day that my contract was expiring that the client did want to extend my contract for a further 6 months (I already knew this from talking with certain managers of the Client except I knew that it was for 12 months not 6). I also received the contract faxed through to me at work. When I received this I immediately noted that the rate was identical, the period was for 6 months and in addition to the standard terms and conditions there was also a clause relating to termination which stated that I would not be able to leave even with 30 days notice unless the Consultancy agreed. However the Consultancy could still get rid of me in 30 days and also if the Client did not need me the Consultance could get rid of me straight away by giving notice. This clause was a major change to what I had previously been on and when I questioned the contracts manager of the Agency (Who had been taken over in the new year by a large IT holding company) I was told that this is the standard contracts that they offer and there was nothing I could do about it. When I mentioned to them that I was not happy to sign they said I would not be able to work onsite without a contract even though I had meetings arranged for the next day. Eventually I suggested that they change the term to 1 month until the issues could be sorted out which they agreed to do. The one month extension is due to expire in a weeks time and I have been advised that I will be offered an 11 month contract plus be getting a rate increase and also that I would be now required to sign a form opting out of new legislation that makes it easier for Contractors to work directly for the Client rather than having to wait 6 months. The rate they offered was less than I wanted but I also discovered that the Consultancy was taking a 30 percent plus cut. The Client has a number of other contractors who are employed via an Agency and I believe if I was working through them the cut of my rate would be less and I would receive better support. My question is this should I approach the client to see if I can attach myself to one of the agencies when my contract comes up and if I attempt to do so is this new legislation effective in my case? If not by working for an agency rather than the client am I breeching the restraint of trade clause in my contract?
Comment