Reply to: opt in/out confusion

[The Lone Gunman]

Really? Thats not been my experience. Paying you before the client pays them is probably the biggest selling point you could make for having an agent in the relationship.

Sorry, was thinking of something else. Agents generaly do offer factoring services.

[insight14]

I also see you as a factoring agent for money although most agents dont pay till the client does so no factoring there.

Really? Thats not been my experience. Paying you before the client pays them is probably the biggest selling point you could make for having an agent in the relationship.

[The Lone Gunman]

Two things here. You dont seem to understand that 90% of what an agent does actually yields no fees whatsoever.. who pays the agent for the fruitless running around?. When you say that you actually do the work, you completely misunderstand the dynamic of how contractors find their jobs. "Your" margin goes to pay the agencies for a lot of the work that does not yield fees. This is why it appears that agencies do little for their margin.

Secondly football agents have sole ownership of their client. Their client cannot go elsewhere for his work. Also employers can ONLY access that particular footballer through one agent. This of course renders the concept of prefeerred suppliers irrelevant.

The two relationships are so far apart that they do not bare any comparison whatsoever.

It is not that I dont understand Dodgy. It is that I have a different viewpoint.
I look at it that if there were no agents then I would still find work, the client would still need me.
If there were no contractors or no clients then there would be no agents. The dynamic of how I find a job has been invented by agents for agents.
I dont care about all your unproductive running around, your inneficiancy or lack of ability should not be my problem.
I see your job as receiving a requirement from a client, advertising said requirement and submitting the responses to the client. Thats all. I also see you as a factoring agent for money although most agents dont pay till the client does so no factoring there.

I dont see why IT agents cant be like football agents. For a good agent I would cut an exclusive deal. If they were any good and had a good stable they would keep their prefered supplier status. Just imagine if you had the top 100 contractors in any given field on your books.

[DodgyAgent]

I dont mind that. I usualy ask for a rate I am happy with, but I worry that the agents mark up may price me out of the market.

I also think there is a moral point (I know this is about business) that the person doing all the work should be getting the money, you do hear stories of agents taking the piss.

What I would realy like is an agent who works similar to a football agent, one who does not have a contract with the client, but arranges for me to have a direct contract and I pay MY agent a percentage of my income as a consequence of that relationship.
The contract between me and my agent will be that he will find me work. Nothing more.
Anybody want to be my Mr 10% or what ever?

Two things here. You dont seem to understand that 90% of what an agent does actually yields no fees whatsoever.. who pays the agent for the fruitless running around?. When you say that you actually do the work, you completely misunderstand the dynamic of how contractors find their jobs. "Your" margin goes to pay the agencies for a lot of the work that does not yield fees. This is why it appears that agencies do little for their margin.

Secondly football agents have sole ownership of their client. Their client cannot go elsewhere for his work. Also employers can ONLY access that particular footballer through one agent. This of course renders the concept of prefeerred suppliers irrelevant.

The two relationships are so far apart that they do not bare any comparison whatsoever.

[Reccon]

thats a fair point - i and dodgy and i am sure many others know where to draw the line. I know my clients and know there situations (future projects, extensions to contracts etc) and from that I know that if i charge a massive margin then the chance of being extended or moved to another project is less. I have always charged what I consider a fair margin and worked at building a relationship with a client for future business........

Thats not to say others wont just charge as much as they can!!Suppose there is good and bad agents as well as good and bad contractors and good and bad in every industry..... just keep trying till you come across one!!

[The Lone Gunman]

Couldn't agree more mate - I am always more than happy to disclose the margin i am working at - at the end of the day if the contractor is happy with his / her rate and the client is happy with the end charge rate then what difference does it make how much is inbetween!

*Preparing myself for a barrage of "your taking more money from the contractor!"

I dont mind that. I usualy ask for a rate I am happy with, but I worry that the agents mark up may price me out of the market.

I also think there is a moral point (I know this is about business) that the person doing all the work should be getting the money, you do hear stories of agents taking the piss.

What I would realy like is an agent who works similar to a football agent, one who does not have a contract with the client, but arranges for me to have a direct contract and I pay MY agent a percentage of my income as a consequence of that relationship.
The contract between me and my agent will be that he will find me work. Nothing more.
Anybody want to be my Mr 10% or what ever?

[Reccon]

That is fair enough, but that is also life. Agents are not paid to indulge contractors by being "nice" to them, they are paid to put bums on seats. Some rare agents are very good at indulging contractors and putting bums on seats. OK it pays to treat contractors professionally (rather than being nice), some do and some do not. The key though for contractors is to understand these harsh realities and use them to their own advantage without getting too bitter and twisted.

As for opting in or out, my own agency does not give a fig what a contractor chooses to do. I am not quite sure why an agent should necessarily be forthcoming about his margin, after all it is the client who is paying for it, not the contractor. In my case I am only ever forthcoming about my margin if it is very low and the contractor/client needs (in my opinion) to realise that I in a tense negotiation I am not profiteering excessivly.

If on the other hand a contractor asks what my margin is I will tell them.

Couldn't agree more mate - I am always more than happy to disclose the margin i am working at - at the end of the day if the contractor is happy with his / her rate and the client is happy with the end charge rate then what difference does it make how much is inbetween!

*Preparing myself for a barrage of "your taking more money from the contractor!"

[boredsenseless]

If on the other hand a contractor asks what my margin is I will tell them.

Thats very decent of you since you are under no obligation at all to disclose that. In fact some of the advice on here to ask the client what they pay is at best a little morally and professionally suspect, and if your contract with the client states the figures are commerical in confidence then the client is in actual fact acting to breach the contract.

[DodgyAgent]

it is all a matter of personal integrity

With all due respect Dodgy, it has been my experience that agents are not the contractors friend.
They are out to screw you down on your rate to maximise their take and beyond that dont care. They say your IR35 status is beyond their control and will do and say pretty much anything to push you down the opt out route to avoid the very obvious responsibilities opting in forces on them.
I have yet to meet an agent who will state their margin up front and who will offer advice based on the contractors benefit first and the consequences to the agent second.

That is fair enough, but that is also life. Agents are not paid to indulge contractors by being "nice" to them, they are paid to put bums on seats. Some rare agents are very good at indulging contractors and putting bums on seats. OK it pays to treat contractors professionally (rather than being nice), some do and some do not. The key though for contractors is to understand these harsh realities and use them to their own advantage without getting too bitter and twisted.

As for opting in or out, my own agency does not give a fig what a contractor chooses to do. I am not quite sure why an agent should necessarily be forthcoming about his margin, after all it is the client who is paying for it, not the contractor. In my case I am only ever forthcoming about my margin if it is very low and the contractor/client needs (in my opinion) to realise that I in a tense negotiation I am not profiteering excessivly.

If on the other hand a contractor asks what my margin is I will tell them.

[The Lone Gunman]

Yeah in much the same way that you would inform a prospective client that the role they are interviewing you for is one that a school leaver could perform for a quarter of the money you'd charge!! Double Standards!!

dont be so pathetic. you have no idea what my standards are. that is an irrelevance anyway, i do not sell my self as representing the client. if a client asked i would feel obliged to answer honestly.
now go ask an agent for a valid reason for opting out as a contractor.

[boredsenseless]

[QUOTE=I have yet to meet an agent who will state their margin up front and who will offer advice based on the contractors benefit first and the consequences to the agent second.[/QUOTE]

Yeah in much the same way that you would inform a prospective client that the role they are interviewing you for is one that a school leaver could perform for a quarter of the money you'd charge!! Double Standards!!

[The Lone Gunman]

You could change the word agentwith anyone for that matter, even "contractor"

With all due respect Dodgy, it has been my experience that agents are not the contractors friend.
They are out to screw you down on your rate to maximise their take and beyond that dont care. They say your IR35 status is beyond their control and will do and say pretty much anything to push you down the opt out route to avoid the very obvious responsibilities opting in forces on them.
I have yet to meet an agent who will state their margin up front and who will offer advice based on the contractors benefit first and the consequences to the agent second.

[DodgyAgent]

Rule 1 of contracting - never ever believe an agent. He is not working for your benefit in any way shape or form.

You could change the word agentwith anyone for that matter, even "contractor"

[The Lone Gunman]

It is out of context because you only posted section B and seemed to be saying that it showed your status as an employee.
That particular section is a statement of what "work finding services" are.
I would suggest that the list of work finding services is not exhaustive and can easily be shown to be so.

Section B clearly states that it is for employees of the employment business, something I am clearly not and no IR35 case has ever attempted to show.
IR35 status has always been used to show an employee relationship between the client and the contractor.
In the rest of the regs, even if you classify yourself under para b) you will find that the agent and the client have to agree whether your contract is OF or FOR service/s which is a clear IR35 indicator.
The agent/employment business is required to make sure that all contract terms match which means there can be no constructed contract for an IR35 case unless the agent hasnt done this and if that is the case you would have a very good argument that you took this contract in good faith that your terms matched the clients terms.

With the added benefit of guaranteed payment and a certain amount of leverage with the going direct clauses it makes no sense to opt out unless the agent offers realy solid outside IR35 contracts.

[tim123]

The quote was out of context and doesnt mean what was proposed anyway!
We dont realy fit any of the categories stated, (a) is the nearest, but most agents claim to be employment businesses due to other parts of the act.

We clearly fit into category (b). We are not seeking direct employment with the client, nor are we seeking to be employed directly by the agency whilst at the client.

'Employed' has a specific legal meaning, and being placed to perform a service is not it. Funnily enough, that fits into category (b).

As to whether it means what it is meant to mean, then that is for a court to decide, if asked.

I don't understand the point about it being out of context. The context is "opting in to the regs" (pendant mode, "not opting out of the regs"). How can quoting the regs be out of context for this discussion?

tim