Reply to: Reneging On A Contract

[Ardesco]

And I think it´s subjective and arbitrary to call this a violation of professionalism.

in that case we probably have different views of what professionalism is, and an argument about it is not going to get us anywhere.

[xara]

There is a difference between re-evaluating your budget after a month or two and realising you have to cut costs and agreeing to a contract that is not financially viable, but not realising it is not financially viable because you haven't done your homework until after you have signed the contract.

There is a difference. But you are making a number of assumptions about how quickly one can evaluate a location abroad and its prospective costs, which is not necessarily possible within the timeframe offered for accepting a contract.

And I think it´s subjective and arbitrary to call this a violation of professionalism.

[Ardesco]

Sorry, but this frankly seems like a double standard to me. Large corporations are allowed to re-evaluate their budgets and cut costs, but contractors are not.

There is a difference between re-evaluating your budget after a month or two and realising you have to cut costs and agreeing to a contract that is not financially viable, but not realising it is not financially viable because you haven't done your homework until after you have signed the contract.

[xara]

There is not going to be much sentimentality in business, however there should be some professionalism. If you are offered a contract you should work out if it is profitable before you sign it, not sign it then wrk out what it's going to cost you and then try and get out of it later...

Sorry, but this frankly seems like a double standard to me. Large corporations are allowed to re-evaluate their budgets and cut costs, but contractors are not. The fact is that companies know fine well that signing up contractors implies a greater risk due to competition and other factors (hence the extremely short notice period on my contract, which would never fly for a permie): if they want to eliminate that risk, they get a permanent member of staff on board.

Professionalism is important to me, but that does not mean going to the extent of imagining obligations and ties that do not exist.

[Ardesco]

While I can sympathise with this point of view to some extent, I have found a complete and total absence of sentimentality on the part of end-clients. If budgets alter or whatever they have no problem getting rid of contractors, none whatsoever. Does that mean that they can be construed as not being a "proper" business?

Cutting costs because you don't have the budget is not the same as signing a contract and then changing your mind at the last minute. We are contractors, we expect to be the first out of the door when clients have problems with thier budgets, it is one of the reasons they get us in rather than hiring permies (If they need to cut costs it's easy to get rid of a contractor, with a permie you are stuffed).

There is not going to be much sentimentality in business, however there should be some professionalism. If you are offered a contract you should work out if it is profitable before you sign it, not sign it then wrk out what it's going to cost you and then try and get out of it later...

[xara]

What is it about contractors at the moment? There's been a few of these "I've signed a contract but want to leave" threads at the moment. I'm not sure what powers HMRC have with an IR35 investigation (will they talk to agencies who have a contract with you, as in this case), but is there a chance that this might be construed as not being a "proper" business??

While I can sympathise with this point of view to some extent, I have found a complete and total absence of sentimentality on the part of end-clients. If budgets alter or whatever they have no problem getting rid of contractors, none whatsoever. Does that mean that they can be construed as not being a "proper" business?

[xara]

What's do good about the second contract that is making you want to not take your first ?

Drastic miscalculation of costs/cash-retention on first contract, largely based on a much more optimistic appraisal of the ease of getting an apartment and other things like that than is actually proving to be the case, now that I´´m looking in earnest. Whereas in the second contract I make about 50% more and those hassles are largely absent, so no sleeping in hotels etc., which I am heartily sick of. On the other hand, the first contract is a far better reference.

Again, thanks all for your comments.

[TheFaQQer]

Talk to the agent first. There is no benefit to anyone by turning up, "working" for three days and then leaving - chances are they will let you go.

Alternatively, they may offer an increased rate to tempt you to stay on.

But be prepared for some degree of reputation damage at the agency and the client, particularly if you turn up and leave in the same week.

What is it about contractors at the moment? There's been a few of these "I've signed a contract but want to leave" threads at the moment. I'm not sure what powers HMRC have with an IR35 investigation (will they talk to agencies who have a contract with you, as in this case), but is there a chance that this might be construed as not being a "proper" business??

[Ardesco]

Thanks all for your comments. I did suspect email was pretty binding.

Fortunately there is a very short notice period initially (3 days). But the whole thing is not due to begin for quite a while, so I would have thought that I am actually saving them time and hassle by just pulling out. I guess I will just go there and immediately serve notice.

You can still talk to your agent and tell him/her that you plan to hand in your notice and work only 3 days. The agent will probably not want to put put you in and release you if that is the case.

[shabbadoof13]

Thanks all for your comments. I did suspect email was pretty binding.

Fortunately there is a very short notice period initially (3 days). But the whole thing is not due to begin for quite a while, so I would have thought that I am actually saving them time and hassle by just pulling out. I guess I will just go there and immediately serve notice.

Hi,

I've been in the position where i've had more than 2 contracts on the table and I can't decide which one. in the end i just emailed to say I was moving away or something and so was unavailable to take that contract.. then they can't really do much about it..I find contracting unique in that you have to always look after number 1 in every situation..

[TheFaQQer]

Find a replacement to do the first contract, and exercise your right of substitution.

[Cooperinliverp00l]

Thanks all for your comments. I did suspect email was pretty binding.

Fortunately there is a very short notice period initially (3 days). But the whole thing is not due to begin for quite a while, so I would have thought that I am actually saving them time and hassle by just pulling out. I guess I will just go there and immediately serve notice.

What's do good about the second contract that is making you want to not take your first ?

[xara]

Thanks all for your comments. I did suspect email was pretty binding.

Fortunately there is a very short notice period initially (3 days). But the whole thing is not due to begin for quite a while, so I would have thought that I am actually saving them time and hassle by just pulling out. I guess I will just go there and immediately serve notice.

[Bluebird]

Depends which legal system the contract is written under. If it's English (or Scottish) Law, then you're stuffed. I have no idea how other countries see such things but I would be surprised if it was significantly different.

You can still not start, just don't expect to get any work from that agency or client again, nor from any related agencies, nor any sympathy from 99% of the people who haunt this board when the agency sues for consequential losses, which they may do. But I suggest you start by talking to the agent...

Mal, even though the gig is outside EU, the chances are the agency is UK based in which case UK law applies.

As you point out thought, reneging on said contract is morally wronganyway, and quite possibly legally wrong wherever it's based...

[malvolio]

If the contract is outside the EU then that might not be so? Surely depends on where the contract is and what the T&Cs are ?

Depends which legal system the contract is written under. If it's English (or Scottish) Law, then you're stuffed. I have no idea how other countries see such things but I would be surprised if it was significantly different.

You can still not start, just don't expect to get any work from that agency or client again, nor from any related agencies, nor any sympathy from 99% of the people who haunt this board when the agency sues for consequential losses, which they may do. But I suggest you start by talking to the agent...