Reply to: restrictions clause

[SueEllen]

Tsk, tsk. Call yourself an IT contractor and you don't know how to configure your email client to never send read receipts?

You don't even need to configure it. Read receipts tend to be in the outbox so you can simply delete them before reading the email.

[billybiro]

Or send Dave an email with read - receipt

Tsk, tsk. Call yourself an IT contractor and you don't know how to configure your email client to never send read receipts?

[billybiro]

Another easy way for a suspicious agent to do it:

Ring main switchboard - "hi, can I speak to Dave Pearson the contractor in the database team please; it's his agent and his mobile is off."

Easy to mitigate.

- "Hi, this is Sharon on main switchboard, I've got Mr Agent from DoNotWant Agency on the line".
- "Ok, put him through".
- "Hi, Dave, this is Mr Agent"
- <putting on best alternative accent> "Hello, Mr Agent, I don't think I know you".
- "Yes you do. You're being a naughty boy working for my client direct when you're bound by a handcuff clause not to do that."
- "Sorry, Mr Agent. I have no idea what you're on about. Who was it you wanted to speak to again?".
- "Dave Pearson"
- "Oohh. Sorry, I'm Dave PETERSON. Must have got our wired crossed there hey? Oh well, these things happen. You're after Dave PEARSON? He hasn't worked here for the last 3 months".

Simples!

Moreover, what would make an agent suspicious enough to make that call in the first place if you've kept your mouth shut?

[LondonManc]

Indeed. I totally agree it's a "risk". Just like crossing a road is a "risk", or riding on a train is a "risk". Or anything else in life is a "risk".

If you're looking at the difference between another 6 month gig and half a year on the bench, I'm sure most of us would be prepared to accept some amount of "risk".

Whilst there's many different ways that an agent could come to hear about a contractor being on site at a client via another agent or direct, there's also lots of ways to talk yourself out of it too, thereby significantly mitigating the risk - if the agent does indeed ever get to know in the first place.

You and NLUK clearly aren't going to agree on this. I'd say that from an agent's point of view, if you were simply looking at dumping me and going direct at the end of the current, I'd pursue it. If you're been away for at least six months then come back, I wouldn't be as inclined.

That said, it also depends on the mark up - if the agent is charging 30% then they deserve to be stiffed over as soon as possible.

[billybiro]

Indeed but all these are hypothetical situations that could have many different outcomes so could discuss endlessly. The point I made is just 'not telling them' is a risk. It appears we have different view on how real that risk is, and whatever our views it really depends on the exact situation so not really worth getting in to it.

My view on risk is partly based on my experience at my last 2 clients who had at least one agency presence on site, the one before that the agent was regularly in the building. Chances of 'not telling them' and getting away with it at these gigs? None. Maybe you've been in a raft of gigs you would never have been found out. Who knows.

Indeed. I totally agree it's a "risk". Just like crossing a road is a "risk", or riding on a train is a "risk". Or anything else in life is a "risk".

If you're looking at the difference between another 6 month gig and half a year on the bench, I'm sure most of us would be prepared to accept some amount of "risk".

Whilst there's many different ways that an agent could come to hear about a contractor being on site at a client via another agent or direct, there's also lots of ways to talk yourself out of it too, thereby significantly mitigating the risk - if the agent does indeed ever get to know in the first place.

[Hertsseasider]

Or send Dave an email with read - receipt

[LondonManc]

Indeed but all these are hypothetical situations that could have many different outcomes so could discuss endlessly. The point I made is just 'not telling them' is a risk. It appears we have different view on how real that risk is, and whatever our views it really depends on the exact situation so not really worth getting in to it.

My view on risk is partly based on my experience at my last 2 clients who had at least one agency presence on site, the one before that the agent was regularly in the building. Chances of 'not telling them' and getting away with it at these gigs? None. Maybe you've been in a raft of gigs you would never have been found out. Who knows.

Another easy way for a suspicious agent to do it:

Ring main switchboard - "hi, can I speak to Dave Pearson the contractor in the database team please; it's his agent and his mobile is off."

[northernladuk]

True, but unless you or the client definitively confirm your engagement with the client to the original agent, then the original agent has got nothing.

So, even the case, as suggested by another poster, that word gets back to the original agent from another contractor that spills the beans, the original agent has no proof. Only simple hearsay. You could easily explain this away as the other contractor having it in for you and telling porkies so as to drop you in it due to him holding some kind of grudge against you.

And, in the case where the client has ditched the original agent for whatever reason, the client is highly unlikely to either confirm your engagement with them or allow the original agent on site to physically check for themselves.

And then what?

Indeed but all these are hypothetical situations that could have many different outcomes so could discuss endlessly. The point I made is just 'not telling them' is a risk. It appears we have different view on how real that risk is, and whatever our views it really depends on the exact situation so not really worth getting in to it.

My view on risk is partly based on my experience at my last 2 clients who had at least one agency presence on site, the one before that the agent was regularly in the building. Chances of 'not telling them' and getting away with it at these gigs? None. Maybe you've been in a raft of gigs you would never have been found out. Who knows.

[LondonManc]

True, but unless you or the client definitively confirm your engagement with the client to the original agent, then the original agent has got nothing.

So, even the case, as suggested by another poster, that word gets back to the original agent from another contractor that spills the beans, the original agent has no proof. Only simple hearsay. You could easily explain this away as the other contractor having it in for you and telling porkies so as to drop you in it due to him holding some kind of grudge against you.

And, in the case where the client has ditched the original agent for whatever reason, the client is highly unlikely to either confirm your engagement with them or allow the original agent on site to physically check for themselves.

And then what?

If the agent is allowed on site, as many are to discuss new roles, what do you think will happen when he meets with manager of Dave, then spies Dave at the desk he was at 3 months ago when the agent last came in? Don't confuse this with me feeling sorry for agents, btw.

In terms of this particular instance, the OP wants to switch immediately from their current agent which, imho, is what this clause is more about than the going back in 9 months. For me, the clause is to protect the agent from client binning them off via serving notice on the contractor then engaging them directly to save money.

We're still no clearer, though, as to understanding why the OP wants to switch.

[billybiro]

I'm sure you aren't that daft I have to explain it to you.

True, but unless you or the client definitively confirm your engagement with the client to the original agent, then the original agent has got nothing.

So, even the case, as suggested by another poster, that word gets back to the original agent from another contractor that spills the beans, the original agent has no proof. Only simple hearsay. You could easily explain this away as the other contractor having it in for you and telling porkies so as to drop you in it due to him holding some kind of grudge against you.

And, in the case where the client has ditched the original agent for whatever reason, the client is highly unlikely to either confirm your engagement with them or allow the original agent on site to physically check for themselves.

And then what?

[NotAllThere]

I'm sure you aren't that daft I have to explain it to you.

He is though.

[SeanT]

If you are a niche specialist and known throughout the country

..

[northernladuk]

And not mentioned
The agency could have an on site presence
Agencies regularly discuss roles and general business with the client
The agency will have his CV there is a good chance he will pop up on CV searches and they will check availability on linked in... And so on. Many many different ways. Enough to make it risky.

[MrMarkyMark]

Do tell.

Depends how big your "world" is.

If you are a niche specialist and known throughout the City, for example, there's a very good chance you would be found out.

I know or have heard of most of the people that contract in my specialism, within IB, as there aren't really that many.
Also, a lot of agents at the big agencies know the strong candidates too, as well as other agents at other bigger agencies.
Another easy way to get found out.

[LondonManc]

Many thanks.Will check.

It is a case of the client willing to take me through their internal agency. My contract is due for an extension and I'm looking to leave the current agency

Totally different - why are you looking at switching?

This is exactly what it's to cover. It's when you've been gone 8 months and the client want you back that it's more likely the agency won't be chasing.

Perhaps there's a better question in this instance - why are you looking at switching?

Do tell.

They'll ring another contractor of theirs on the same floor....

"Shame Dave left, he seemed happy"
"He's still here pal...."