going back

[TestMangler]

What a steaming load of absolute crap. Words fail me. It's not even worth going through all that to correct and explain.

LOL. absolutely.

The agent is not preventing the OP from going to work 'anywhere'. Just that client.

A football agent could easily tie a footballer to them for their period at a particular club and prevent them re-signing for that club with a different agent.

[northernladuk]

Like a footballer, if your out of contract, then you should be free to sign for whoever you want.
Otherwise isnt it breaking the EU law of Freedom of Movement for Workers and possibly restraint of trade?
So whats stopping a football team placing a handcuff clause on contracted footballers? so when they contract expires, they cant play for another club for 12 months.

Would probably take longer than 12 months to go through all the channels & appeal courts though.

What a steaming load of absolute crap. Words fail me. It's not even worth going through all that to correct and explain.

[AMH]

Like a footballer, if your out of contract, then you should be free to sign for whoever you want.
Otherwise isnt it breaking the EU law of Freedom of Movement for Workers and possibly restraint of trade?
So whats stopping a football team placing a handcuff clause on contracted footballers? so when they contract expires, they cant play for another club for 12 months.

Would probably take longer than 12 months to go through all the channels & appeal courts though.

[jonesy87]

You can have as many companies as you like on a psl.

The agreement wont be with the client its the agency your services are effectively tied in with them to that client.

The client might not hire you on the basis if that is in your agreement it will be in theirs and in that case it will be worth it. Because im guessing its the agency who have beeing paying your day rate?

If they take you direct or from another they could charge your whole contract to that client

You need to read your agreement with the agency

[BlasterBates]

Discussed many times, restriction clauses are mainly a deterrant and in any case can only be used to protect legitimate interest. As cojak says in this particular case the agency wouldn't have a leg to stand on, so just go ahead.

There are no cases like this that have gone to court, that's because no agency would bother chasing it up, particularly in a case like this, though as cojak says they might shout.

The only time it's clear cut is when you jump mid contract, at all other times it is very questionable as to whether it's legit.

Agencies are being removed from PSLs all the time and it's quite normal for contractors simply to move agencies. No deals are done with the agencies dropped. Agencies will grudgingly accept because they will still hope to get business with the client and because legally there 's not much point in chasing it anyway.

[GillsMan]

12 months might be hard to enforce. I've always asked that to be changed down to 3-6 months.

[thunderlizard]

Anyone know where I stand on applying?

The end client is the only one that really knows. Maybe they really have changed preferred supplier - in which case they should have worked out some agreement for moving contractors over. Or maybe the new agency is spinning you a line; they aren't an authorised supplier at all and are trying to use you to get some business. Assuming you left them on speaking terms, ask them what's going on?

[TestMangler]

I have been contracting for a while but have never encountered this situation before.

I finished a contract a few months ago. One of the terms of the contract was that I would not work for the client within 12 months of leaving without going through the agency.

I have now been called by another agent for the same client. It turns or the client has changed preferred suppliers.

Anyone know where I stand on applying?

I've had this happen before when the client moved from one major preferred agency to another. It never actually came up as an issue. I mentioned it to the 'new' agency so that it wasn't kept hidden, but they didn't seem to care.

I'm sure when the client removes a sole/preferred supplier from their agreement, then these potential issues will be dealt wit,

[cojak]

I have been contracting for a while but have never encountered this situation before.

I finished a contract a few months ago. One of the terms of the contract was that I would not work for the client within 12 months of leaving without going through the agency.

I have now been called by another agent for the same client. It turns or the client has changed preferred suppliers.

Anyone know where I stand on applying?

I would apply. If the original agency has been dumped by the client you aren't depriving them of commission. They may shout but they don't have a leg to stand on.

[NetContractor]

I have been contracting for a while but have never encountered this situation before.

I finished a contract a few months ago. One of the terms of the contract was that I would not work for the client within 12 months of leaving without going through the agency.

I have now been called by another agent for the same client. It turns or the client has changed preferred suppliers.

Anyone know where I stand on applying?