Oputing out at renewal?

Re: .

Hi Tim.

The agency are the ones who want the same terms as the old contract.
I am the one who wants to change them or be opted in.
Continuing on the same terms without me opting out surely means that I am by default opted in and thus the terms are invalid which do not comply with the regs?

The agency do not want to supply an opted in contract, citing the clients "lack of position" wrt opting in/out - but equally they cannot MAKE me opt out, so I guess they are adopting a "do nothing" stance until the client comes out with a definite policy, in which case they can say "we HAVE to do this because the client wants it, take it or leave it"....

cheers.

Re: .

warner ,

you are renewing a contract. This will continue on the same terms unless you all agree to new ones or somebody declines to continue on the same terms. It is likely that for the purposes of the agency rules the courts will see the renewall as the same 'position' and ISTM that it is the agency who are disinclined to accept same terms and are therefore the ones 'at fault'.

tim

Re: .

Tim - I am not terminating a contract though - the contract ended and we are failing to agree terms for a renewal.

Thanks for the input though.

Mailman - sadly not no, I do not just work as a contractor through this company - other ventures on the go etc....

cheers

Re: .

Doubt it, mailman... the Act specifies that the terms apply to the worker himself, not to his ltd company

.

What if...the contract comes to an end...you change the name of your limited company and then create a new relationship between the place you work at now and your new limited liability company...who just happen to be supplying you to do the work?

Is that a work around?

Mailman

Re: 8 weeks.

The 8 weeks is just one of the options.

The other is that the agency can charge the client a transfer fee if you go back earlier. There is probably already a clause in the contract with this option.

So ISTM that clause 10 (3) will apply: Which seems to state that this clause will be unenforcable if the the agency do not continue to supply the worker to the client, unless the agency are not at fault. So if you (or the client) terminate the agency contract one week and you go back to the client the next week they can charge the fee. If the agency terminate the contract one week and you go back to the client the next the lose the right to charge their fee

HTH

tim

Re: .

I'm trying

The tactic now appears to be "if you don't continue with us then there will be an 8 week handover period to another agency" effectively trying to say I cannot work for that length of time for the same client.

.

Put it in to terms they can understand...EITHER they give you want they want OR they will lose any income from your position.

Im sure once they are faced with the possibility of you walking that they will quickly come around to your view :rollin

After all...they are a business [and some dollars are better than no dollars at all]...as some of our agency apologists like to quote :rollin

Re: .

I object to an extended post termination clause.
I have given the agent the option to reduce this in the existing contract and I would then "choose" to opt out, but they don't want to do that either.
I have been with the client for several years now so the agency have had their moneiy's worth - it's not like I've been there 5 mins and now want to go direct.

It's more a matter of principle than anything else....

Re: .

warner,

This is really something for your client to decide. The rules in the new regs for opted-in contractors dictate what the client has to pay to transfer a temp worker. A contractor who wants to ditch the agent and go direct has to have the co-operation of the client. If the client has already negotiated a PSA with a low margin, by the time that the client has deducted their extra costs of dealing with a lone direct contractor you would be no better off, so why do you need the opted-in security blanket?

tim

Re: .

They always cite "we have one contract covering all contractors with the client", they cannot possibly change any terms etc (eg their %), and I know they are on a low rate anyway (I've seen the financial schedule the client signs).

The client (as in the legal dept) are still thinking how to approach the whole issue, across the entire business.

The client (as in the person I work for) couldn't give a monkeys about contracts so long as the work is done.

I am trying to establish my legal rights here to walk away from the agency and either do direct or go through another agency (if the client insists) because my current one failed to supply a contract.
Since I am still working there, does that mean it's a moot point and I am contract IN anyway regardless of what any contract I sign might stay?
Or am I bound by the terms of the previous contract which restricts my ability to contact the client post-termination?

thanks

.

The agency cannot refuse to accept it if you decide to opt in.

If they want you to opt out...get them to front up with more cash. Simple really :rollin

Mailman

Hi,

What is the situation with regard to renewals and these Agency regulation?
My current contract expired on 1st July and I am still working at the client but not signed anything.
The agency want me to opt out.
The client has "no official position" yet.
Meanwhile, I am still working there.

Does this mean:
1. The old t&c apply, execpt that I am opted in so things like termination clauses are invalid?
2. I am considered opted out by default and this cannt be changed now that the renewal date has passed?
3. It might as well be a brand new contract and I can still choose to opt in or out

If I chose to opt in and the agnecy refuses to accept this, does that mean I am free to persue the contract with someone else/direclty since we have failed to reach agreement?

any thoughts on this would be most appreciated.

thanks.