Reply to: End client does not want to approve timesheets

[gallotta]

I completely agree and thank you all (even the ones dissing ) . As of yesterday, this is gone with The Thomas Higgins Partnership, let's see how things develop, will keep you posted

[Wanderer]

I do sympathise with the client there. Clients should pay contractors for producing, not for bum-on-seat time. All very well to say that the first week is "ramping up", but if that never translates into a result I don't know what service you can say you're billing for.

Well, it depends on the contract. Was the contract to deliver a specific piece of work, scoped out and specified up front with a load of pre-sales work and detailed requirements and delivered at a fixed price? Or was it for the contractor to come and work for the client as a bum on a seat for x number of days. If it was the latter (which most contracts are) then you can't expect a contractor to hit the ground running. If the client wants a bum on a seat then they have to pay the money for them to some up to speed.

You're billing the agency, not the client. You gave the agency what they asked for. If the agent didn't give the client what the client asked for, that's the agent's fault. The agent should act like a real business rather than just a pimp.

Really, that's what it boils down to. Agencies will keep messing contractors around unless contractors stand up to the agencies and make them pay for dicking us around.

Send the threatening letter then file a case using Money Claim if they don't pay. I wouldn't waste a load of time preparing an elaborate case though - as others say, your energies are best spent on looking for the next contract.

[northernladuk]

This does rather piss on your view that an agency is giving you a cut of their money NL.
.

I don't see how it does that. Doesn't say anywhere the agent got paid by the client and even if he did the agent has a joker card to piss the OP about, not pay him and keep the dosh. The mechanics of it are still the same but in this case people are playing silly buggers. What is supposed to happen and what happens when people start arguing and being daft are very different things.

[MrF]

First you are going to have to determine your Opt In/Out status. This is pretty simple

Did you sign an opt out declaration?

If no then you are opted in.

If yes, then question becomes one of timing, if you signed it before introduction to client (interview/start work) then you are opted out, if you signed it after introduction then opted in

If opted out, contract wording will determine if you are meant to be paid even without timesheets
If opted in, you must be paid regardless of provision of timesheets or whatever else contract says about documentation

But either way, you are going to have hard fight ahead. Best of luck

Do you know where I can read more about this? I am in the situation where the client tries to stitch up the agency and the agency seems to be too lame to bother take a fight with the client.

Any hints very much appreciated. I was introduced, had a client meeting and started to work one day before the opt-out was signed so the opt-out is dated one day after the client introduction. Got the emails etc to prove it.

[MarillionFan]

Unfortunately WHS and WSS

This does rather piss on your view that an agency is giving you a cut of their money NL.

As has been said, I would invoice the agency and followup with a more strongly worded legal letter. But, having been in a similar position where a client terminated a contract on me after five days with the 'didn't deliver anything' and 'took a day off without telling us' approach I couldn't prove that they had received the work, OK'd it and agreed to a day off because it was on their work email and they revoked it.

Always cover your ass with emails to yourself & ensure everything is agreed and signed off. Never show the client your agency terms.

[northernladuk]

Do yourself a favour mate and chalk this one up to experience.

Unfortunately WHS

We aren't dissing you gallotta and wish you well with whatever action you decide to take.

Good luck!

and WSS

[cojak]

We aren't dissing you gallotta and wish you well with whatever action you decide to take.

Good luck!

[Ignis Fatuus]

I do sympathise with the client there. Clients should pay contractors for producing, not for bum-on-seat time. All very well to say that the first week is "ramping up", but if that never translates into a result I don't know what service you can say you're billing for.

In that case yes, take the legal route with the agency. It's their greedy mistake after all.

You're billing the agency, not the client. You gave the agency what they asked for. If the agent didn't give the client what the client asked for, that's the agent's fault. The agent should act like a real business rather than just a pimp.

Agents should decide whether contractors work for them or for the client. If the former, then the agent's relations with the client are nothing to do with it. If the latter, then they should dump all that stuff about their relation with the client (billing rate etc) not being your business.

I have had agents do the same: generally speaking I don't think they pass on any specifications that you make before a contract, they just let you go in and fix it yourself. I have for example emphasized to the agent that I would not be arriving on Monday mornings before X o'clock because of flight timings, and got it agreed, only to find on the first day that the client was phoning round to find out why I hadn't arrived yet. On another occasion I specified days when I would not be available to work ("holidays" IOW), and got it agreed. On arrival on site I pointed these days out to the client again (or so I thought), and the client's response was, "I can't let you know yet". Obviously he had never heard of it, but worse, felt it was still his decision to make. I didn't: the decision point was when I specified not working on those days - if not agreed, I wouldn't take the contract. Problem was of course that I agreed that with my contracting party, i.e. the agent, but in reality the client is the other party.

[gallotta]

Just to put this to bed without going into many details, I was asked on the first day, to take on an initial RFP, all the subsequent changes, and 6 RFP responses to review and discuss over meetings in the next following 4 days. Since I was going on holiday the day after, and the client had agreed to this, I had to do this while on my time off, early mornings, late nights, take conference calls from abroad, review comments, etc,etc. That is what I was calling ramping up....

[DS23]

Finally got to the client... They still maintain they will not sign the timesheets, so I believe it is time to take some action \:\)

take a long hard look at what you achieved in that first week. did you add any value? it is absolutely crucial for a contractor to be able to deliver right from the start of a contract. needing to ramp-up is not an excuse.

okay, easing into a contract is common enough - plenty of clients are unprepared and rather force a new contractor to be idle (no network, no documents, no desk, no team kickoff etc.) but regardless - you must be focused on delivering something *anything* that will prove to the client that you are worth it. first impressions are absolutely vital and if you want to ensure that a contract has legs: provide a solution to a problem the client has, make sure you ask plenty of pertinent questions in those initial meetings, make plentyof notes and start writing documentation, make friends with the permanent staff, show interest in the projects and company strategy, arrive early and stay late, do something to make someone on the client side say "thanks!"...

put yourself in their shoes - did you deliver anything?

i thinking not and for that reason i'm with clippy and cojak.

[thunderlizard]

I do sympathise with the client there. Clients should pay contractors for producing, not for bum-on-seat time. All very well to say that the first week is "ramping up", but if that never translates into a result I don't know what service you can say you're billing for.

In that case yes, take the legal route with the agency. It's their greedy mistake after all.

[cojak]

I have to side with Clippy here, you might spend more time and money fighting for this money than going for the next contract.

It would be different if you're fighting for the last week's payment on a contract, but it's not.

[Clippy]

Do yourself a favour mate and chalk this one up to experience.

[gallotta]

Finally got to the client... Their view is they don't want to sign for two reasons:
1) they feel they did not get value for money on the first week, (second week there was very little work done, I have billed them for less than a day) so I explained that for anyone first week is all ramping up, reviewing documents, etc, etc
2) they were not aware of the arrangements I had agreed with the agency, so I emailed all the emails where I had asked the agent to make sure everyone was on the same page before signing the contract. Obviously they had not done that.

They still maintain they will not sign the timesheets, so I believe it is time to take some action \:\)

[BlasterBates]

Difficult one, to chase this up you need proof you delivered, but that will be difficult because the client isn't going help you. Send them a bill for your services and then maybe chase up with a lawyer but I wouldn't spend too much on it, because you don't really don't have any proof. One angle might be to get some letter of confirmation from the client that you disagreed on the contract, and sue the agency on the basis of that.