Client HR preventing contract renewal after 2 years despite going through 3rd party

[TheFaQQer]

Am I right in thinking the 2 year rule is complete nonsense and there is no danger of employment rights applying for someone who is supplying business services via a ltd company and who only has an employment contract with that limited company.

Not entirely, no.

Just because you have an employment contract with your own limited company (hope you're paying NMW and making sure you follow all those nice HR laws!) doesn't mean that you couldn't be an employee of another company.

Even my IR35-caught contract seeks to show that I'm not an employee - it states that I "shall not be regarded for any purpose an employee of ...", highlighting the difference between taxation law and employment law quite neatly.

There have been cases in the past where contractors took their client to employment tribunals to argue for employee rights, though, which is why some clients are wary of what might happen in the future.

Start working on your handover and get looking for something else.

[northernladuk]

I know their understanding of the 2 year rule is incorrect to start with but can anyone point to relevant information on government / legal / tribunal type pages that I can provide as ammunition for the discussion with HR.

Thanks for your help!

This is not your fight and a contractor trying to change client policybisnonly going to label you as a trouble maker. You are just a cork in the ocean now and will have to ride it through.

Presume it isn't going to happen, start your handover and look for new work in what ever timescales you like. If they pull something off and you are back in then happy days, if not then you've not lost anything.

Even if HR relent, which is very unlikely, there is the handcuff problems. A lot of negotiating to be done just for one contractor who, however important, is not irreplaceable.

[jmo21]

"Dear HR,
I hereby declare that I will not try and claim for employment rights.

regards,
dingdong"

[MrMarkyMark]

HR run companies now. Don't go against HR.

Very true, to a certain extent, but, it depends how high up the chain the sign off goes.

They will still jump if the right person asks .

+ FTFY

the likes of Hyphen and Resource Solutions run companies now. Don't go against them.

[dingdong]

Unfortunately challenging HR policies just isn't done in this organisation so there is no chance of anyone fighting the existing 2 year policy for me. HR have all the power.

However the good news is I have no exclusivity clause in my contract with Reed as I was a referral rather than someone they found

There is a blanket ban on permie recruitment currently so that is not an option.

Am I right in thinking the 2 year rule is complete nonsense and there is no danger of employment rights applying for someone who is supplying business services via a ltd company and who only has an employment contract with that limited company.

[BrilloPad]

Also, if the client wants you that badly, they should be able to sign this off, whatever HR says.

HR run companies now. Don't go against HR.

[MrMarkyMark]

Also, if the client wants you that badly, they should be able to sign this off, whatever HR says.

[BrilloPad]

Seems generous to me. Most have a six month break.

Why don't you go permie?

[MrMarkyMark]

Sounds messy, also even if you did manage to pull this off, Reed may well kick up a fuss.
What does the contract say about exclusivity, with regards to Reed?

[dingdong]

I have my own ltd company and contract to end clientco via Reed.

Clientco HR has a blanket hard and fast rule that no contractors can work past two years due to fears of employment rights applying.

I am now at 2 years, and not planning to recontract via Reed.

However my client is keen to keep me for longer and a third party major supplier at clientco has agreed that I could contract through them instead. Any contract would then be between my ltd company and the third party supplier, and I'd be supplying services as part of the work they are doing for clientco.

However clientco HR are still objecting to this and saying a break in service of 3 months would still be required to prevent employment rights applying!!

I know their understanding of the 2 year rule is incorrect to start with but can anyone point to relevant information on government / legal / tribunal type pages that I can provide as ammunition for the discussion with HR.

Thanks for your help!