Reply to: agency wants to be consulting company and my company the supplier

[TonyF]

PS. A real consultancy has skin in the game - I have worked with the owners who themselves are C-level consultants.

I've worked with many people who I would have regarded as C-level. Some were also FW-level.

[m0n1k3r]

Just my name and the company. They didn’t want anyone knowing that they used contractors.

The consultancy I work for (a real consultancy) do use contractors and are open about it. They wouldn’t dream of doing that.

PS. A real consultancy has skin in the game - I have worked with the owners who themselves are C-level consultants. Recruitment agencies dressed up as consultancies are always agencies with the same feral ethics; they can’t help themselves.

I have to admit being one of those consultancy owners (not recruitment agency). I work with executives at clients on a daily basis, have been doing it since 1994, and frequently bring a team of people to deliver what we have agreed. The team is usually a blend of associated consultants (e.g. contractors) that we work with over and over again, and perm staff. I might not spend more than one day a week on that particular client, but I'm most definitely part of that team. The recruitment agency-type consultancies are diluting the value of working with a proper consultancy and just simply brings confusion to clients, who eventually believe that unless you are Bain or McKinsey, you are a recruitment agency "consultancy".

The reason I asked is because we do give associated consultants business cards, but the title makes it quite clear that it is an independent subcontractor, and we do not try to pamper over the fact that they are not perm staff - the client will find out anyway, sooner or later.

Once in a while I also take short-term and especially part-time contracts through agencies, if they have something interesting to offer and the terms are right. I simply view them as an outsourced sales team.

[cojak]

What did the business cards say? Did they include something to distinguish you from a bona fide employee, such as "Associate Consultant" or similar?

Companies such as BT use a lot of subcontractors, all working under the BT brand name for the purpose of presenting a coherent image to the customer. That does not mean they are disguised employees of BT (they are usually bona fide employees of the subcontractor, even if the subcontractor only have one employee).

Just my name and the company. They didn’t want anyone knowing that they used contractors.

The consultancy I work for (a real consultancy) do use contractors and are open about it. They wouldn’t dream of doing that.

PS. A real consultancy has skin in the game - I have worked with the owners who themselves are C-level consultants. Recruitment agencies dressed up as consultancies are always agencies with the same feral ethics; they can’t help themselves.

[m0n1k3r]

I was in this exact position and got out the moment the ‘consultancy gave me a set of business cards despite my explicit instruction not to do this.

If the consultancy wants to present you to the client as a disguised employee you are smack inside IR35 territory anyway.

Time to move on (I lasted less than 8 weeks).

What did the business cards say? Did they include something to distinguish you from a bona fide employee, such as "Associate Consultant" or similar?

Companies such as BT use a lot of subcontractors, all working under the BT brand name for the purpose of presenting a coherent image to the customer. That does not mean they are disguised employees of BT (they are usually bona fide employees of the subcontractor, even if the subcontractor only have one employee).

[cojak]

I was in this exact position and got out the moment the ‘consultancy gave me a set of business cards despite my explicit instruction not to do this.

If the consultancy wants to present you to the client as a disguised employee you are smack inside IR35 territory anyway.

Time to move on (I lasted less than 8 weeks).

[m0n1k3r]

Hi

just got a contract through, and the agency who did the arrangement want to be the consulting company hired to the end client who will use my company as a supplier to them.
Sounds pretty dodgy as a way to avoid agency regulations. Anyone else had to deal with something like this? I'm tempted to tell them to jump.

thanks

The agency regulations doesn't apply to just any intermediary. In fact, it doesn't apply to the kind of contract that most LtdCo contractors are seeking (e.g. non-IR35). From the regulations:

“work-finding services” means services (whether by the provision of information or otherwise) provided—

(a) by an agency to a person for the purpose of finding that person employment or seeking to find that person employment;

(b) by an employment business to an employee of the employment business for the purpose of finding or seeking to find another person, with a view to the employee acting for and under the control of that other person;

(c) by an employment business to a person (the “first person”) for the purpose of finding or seeking to find another person (the “second person”), with a view to the first person becoming employed by the employment business and acting for and under the control of the second person;

What makes you think they are an agency?

[WTFH]

What answer were you hoping to get? That you could sue someone?

[captainjon]

Can we move to general. Nothing else professional in this thread.

i agree

[northernladuk]

Can we move to general. Nothing else professional in this thread.

[captainjon]

How many staff do you have?

Irrelevant. Good to see so many people here sticking up for dodgy agencies and dodgy contracts.

[northernladuk]

There could be a possible upside that you won't be exposed to the yearly rate cuts in the banks and furloughs/culls.

I remember at Barclays the way to get around it all was to get yourself moved on the Tech Mahindra managed service account and off Hays.

[vwdan]

A) They said the client is forcing this contract, and b) they only seem to have 1 staff.

How many staff do you have?

[captainjon]

And you know how?

If they have one person doing consultancy work then they are a consultancy.

A) They said the client is forcing this contract, and b) they only seem to have 1 staff.

[SueEllen]

they are by any definition, a pure recruitement agency, a small one at that. they dont consult on anything.

And you know how?

If they have one person doing consultancy work then they are a consultancy.

[northernladuk]

you're probably still under the impression its an employment contract. its not.

Nope. I quite understand it's a B2B contract with a company that is offering some fixed price or service orientated piece of work under a consultancy agreement.

I'm also clear that this engagement isn't a typical agency type bum on seat offering so agency regs do not apply. The agency in this case is acting as a consultancy. Nothing wrong with that.

but i guess the government are fuming since its now so easy to bypass agency regulations, right?

I don't think they really care about the agency regs to be fair. Only you seem to be getting hot under the collar about it all. I'm not sure we've actually seen any evidence on here where quoting the agency regs have made one iota of difference anyway. Agencies don't properly understand it, many contractors don't and in the end they all seem pretty irrelevant. Why are you still banging on about it?

they are by any definition, a pure recruitement agency, a small one at that. they dont consult on anything.

It appears they do now.

I assume you've declined the work already or will be doing so imminently?