Another quick opt question

[Archangel]

I don't care how you think it should be seen, if the client see it differently, then the client see it differently, end of.

As to the handcuff you stated, that's the aiting period between contracts. Opted in you can go direct after 14 weeks without a waiting period.

tim

Tim, I think I'm being a bit thick here (no news there then!) but I don;t understand what happened, could you explain for the hard of thinking?

1) You got a gig through an agency
2) You opted in to the regs
3) The client didn't renew you "because he didn't want to pay the agency cut"

What has 3 got to do with 2?

[tim123]

What? Opted in you have a maximum 6 weeks handcuff, opt out it's anything up to 6 months. And the agent doesn't get a cut, he gets the business. You get the cut.

I don't care how you think it should be seen, if the client see it differently, then the client see it differently, end of.

As to the handcuff you stated, that's the aiting period between contracts. Opted in you can go direct after 14 weeks without a waiting period.

tim

[TheFaQQer]

After going direct and having to dump a load of legal threats from an agency in the bin, I now find myself inthe position where the same agency is courting me for work. To me this shows that there really is nothing in the handcuffs legislation otherwise they would have followed it up surely? And yes I knwo tha tone swallow doesn't make a summer, but still.

And as for a Fair Agent? Isn't that an oxymoron along the lines of "police intelligence"?

orgy

[NickNick]

Listen guys. What's all this about? We are the Ltd Co Big Boys in the contracting/temp (sorry if that word offends) world.

Did we survive before this opt in/out thing - der...yes. It is govt sponsered control freak nonsense and many of you are biting this maggot. This legislation is aimed at low level temp staff. As the PCG has stated, we can stand on our own feet. I don't need no govt legislation to get my money or anythingelse. They should p!ss off out of our business. If you need to rely on this piece of ballpat legislation go back to the permie world where you belong. And as for going direct - you can go direct any time if the client allows it. Twice in the last 8 years after an agent p1ssed me off I simply went direct. Agent whined like a sick dog, but that's all. On the other hand if the agent is fair and good you should not try it on.

After going direct and having to dump a load of legal threats from an agency in the bin, I now find myself inthe position where the same agency is courting me for work. To me this shows that there really is nothing in the handcuffs legislation otherwise they would have followed it up surely? And yes I knwo tha tone swallow doesn't make a summer, but still.

And as for a Fair Agent? Isn't that an oxymoron along the lines of "police intelligence"?

[KevinS]

On the other hand if the agent is fair and good you should not try it on.

[Turion]

Listen guys. What's all this about? We are the Ltd Co Big Boys in the contracting/temp (sorry if that word offends) world.

Did we survive before this opt in/out thing - der...yes. It is govt sponsered control freak nonsense and many of you are biting this maggot. This legislation is aimed at low level temp staff. As the PCG has stated, we can stand on our own feet. I don't need no govt legislation to get my money or anythingelse. They should p!ss off out of our business. If you need to rely on this piece of ballpat legislation go back to the permie world where you belong. And as for going direct - you can go direct any time if the client allows it. Twice in the last 8 years after an agent p1ssed me off I simply went direct. Agent whined like a sick dog, but that's all. On the other hand if the agent is fair and good you should not try it on.

[malvolio]

Opting in cost me an extension at my last client because he wasn't prepared to carry on paying the agent's cut.

I won't opt in for gigs at small companies again, if I can help it.

tim

What? Opted in you have a maximum 6 weeks handcuff, opt out it's anything up to 6 months. And the agent doesn't get a cut, he gets the business. You get the cut.

[tim123]

I think that's a members only resource... but to answer the question, the intent of the rules is "When the client knows who you are". Typically for us that will be when the CV hits the Hiring Manager's in tray, but if you think of the girl from Office Angels who these rules are aimed at (and which is why we struggle to make them fit our needs), it's when she walks in the door on her first day.

The usual advice is to opt out anyway, usually when you apply for the role to avoid the timing issue, and then opt back in if there's a benefit in doing so (which personally I've yet to find, but that's just me).

Opting in cost me an extension at my last client because he wasn't prepared to carry on paying the agent's cut.

I won't opt in for gigs at small companies again, if I can help it.

tim

[malvolio]

Look on the PCG website and search the forum here.

It still won't be clear so as with many parts of UK legislation it's up to you to read the actual act and look for case law that confirms your view.

The crucial point of this clause is what does "introduced to" mean?

BTW the grey areas can actually work in your favour if you need to take legal action against someone.

I think that's a members only resource... but to answer the question, the intent of the rules is "When the client knows who you are". Typically for us that will be when the CV hits the Hiring Manager's in tray, but if you think of the girl from Office Angels who these rules are aimed at (and which is why we struggle to make them fit our needs), it's when she walks in the door on her first day.

The usual advice is to opt out anyway, usually when you apply for the role to avoid the timing issue, and then opt back in if there's a benefit in doing so (which personally I've yet to find, but that's just me).

[tim123]

It's not "meet" the client, but "introduced to" the client that opts you in.. So a telephone conversation with the client is considered an introduction, and so opted in..

In the legal sense, even having your CV sent to the client could be held to be "introduced".

tim

[SueEllen]

Where is a clear guide on this opt-in opt-out malarky?

Look on the PCG website and search the forum here.

It still won't be clear so as with many parts of UK legislation it's up to you to read the actual act and look for case law that confirms your view.

The crucial point of this clause is what does "introduced to" mean?

BTW the grey areas can actually work in your favour if you need to take legal action against someone.

[PAH]

Where is a clear guide on this opt-in opt-out malarky?

[TheFaQQer]

It's not "meet" the client, but "introduced to" the client that opts you in.. So a telephone conversation with the client is considered an introduction, and so opted in..

WHS - but don't expect an agent to understand that. They will always insist that you can opt out until you start work.

[KevinS]

It's not "meet" the client, but "introduced to" the client that opts you in.. So a telephone conversation with the client is considered an introduction, and so opted in..

[badger7579]

I see that legally if you meet the client you are opted in automatically. Does this include telephone interviews. Physically I have not met the client...?