Notice period for Agency, but no notice period for contractor

[boredsenseless]

And I still fail to see why you're so hellbent of negotiating away a clause that will save you around 15% of your gross tax bill. Oh well, it's your money.

Ultimately a lot comes down to you! How skilled and in demand are you? If you can get another job by just letting one or two people know you are available then there is no issue. If on the other hand you struggle to get work when a contract ends maybe you need the security of notice periods. But then are you in the right game if you aren't in demand?

[malvolio]

And I still fail to see why you're so hellbent of negotiating away a clause that will save you around 15% of your gross tax bill. Oh well, it's your money.

[The Master]

That's right - remember you are negotiating on behalf of your business to ensure your shareholders continue to get best value. If you're happy with the negotiated terms, go for it. If you're not, say so. If a compromise can be reached, fine. If not and it is a deal breaker, tell the other party it's your way or the highway. Likewise don't be surprised if the reverse is true.

Whatever you do though, don't sign up and then start bleating that "it's not fair". Your a tough nosed negotiator working on behalf of your business now, not an employee being mollycoddled by the state. If you don't like what you've signed up to it's no one's fault but yours.

That's part and parcel of contracting, and what makes it so refreshing.

[boredsenseless]

There is far too much complaining about rights and fairness in the contracting world. Lets set one thing straight right now...

Business isn't fair, Employment is regulated so its fairer but it still isn't 100% fair.

If you want fairness and security and protection from people renaging on contracts or insisting on what you see as unfair and unbalanced contract terms then go back to employment.

Businesses are only as fair as your negoitiating skills, if you can negotiate it you can have it.

Once again IT ISN'T MEANT TO BE FAIR - and that is why you get paid more

[tim123]

No thats not unfair but if the builder committed to you for 3 months and turned his other clients away to be held to that contract then it would be unfair if his client was able to walk away after he turned down other opportunities - I simply have a business rule that says I will commit to my client as much as they are willing to commit to my business. If we don't agree I have a right to turn the work down as they have the right to turn me down - its called negotiation. If the client/agent had no notice period either way then I'm happy with that also.

This may be true, but I was addressing the point from Mailman about it being legally invalid as unfair.

It's neither unfair (as you seem to agree), nor illegal and thus unenforcable.

If, from a business standpoint you do not wish to enter into such a contract then you are free to make that decision. But you cannot, as Mailman is advocating, take the view that the clause is unfair, unenforcable and thus ignorable.

If, as a company director, you agree, on behalf of your company, to perform a contract for a (reasonable) fixed period or one with unequal or longish termination clauses then the courts will uphold those clauses and expect you to provide specific performance or the normal compensation for lack thereof.

So what is a reasonable fixed/notice period for a 'professional' service. We can argue over this all day I'm sure, but back in the world of 'employment', senior professional staff are on three, or somtimes even six months notice so I can't see how anyone is going to argue that the same time period for the supply of professional services is unfair.

timmy

[privateeye]

And in what way do you think that being held to a three month fixed term is unfair.

If you contracted a builder to build an extension for you, and the estimated time is three months, do you think that it is fair to have a contractual condition that the builder should actually complete the work?

tim

No thats not unfair but if the builder committed to you for 3 months and turned his other clients away to be held to that contract then it would be unfair if his client was able to walk away after he turned down other opportunities - I simply have a business rule that says I will commit to my client as much as they are willing to commit to my business. If we don't agree I have a right to turn the work down as they have the right to turn me down - its called negotiation. If the client/agent had no notice period either way then I'm happy with that also.

[tim123]

No matter what people like Tim will say , contracts do actually have to be fair and equitable. If a contract for "employment" looks like it leans too heavily in favour of the agency/employer then most likely an tribunal will look more favourably in favour of the contractor/employee.

Mailman

And in what way do you think that being held to a three month fixed term is unfair.

If you contracted a builder to build an extension for you, and the estimated time is three months, do you think that it is fair to have a contractual condition that the builder should actually complete the work?

tim

[malvolio]

I'm sure I said this already but I'll say it again - if they can cancel and you can't, there is no Mutuality Of Obligation, therefore it is highly likely you cannot be caught by IR35.

Is that too difficult to understand?

[jamesc1]

Thanks

Its not a big deal really, I just thought it was unfair and was thinking if the job isn’t what it was sold to be and I left then could I be liable to pay the agency commission for the remaining duration.

Very interesting to get all your views though
Thanks for all your comments.

[Mailman]

It may not be illegal but if this ever went to court the likelyhood of the no notice clause being upheld is remote.

No matter what people like Tim will say , contracts do actually have to be fair and equitable. If a contract for "employment" looks like it leans too heavily in favour of the agency/employer then most likely an tribunal will look more favourably in favour of the contractor/employee.

Mailman

[The Master]

Quite right. Generally speaking all's fair in b2b contracts. Unless it's requiring you to do something illegal of course.

[boredsenseless]

Yes its common practice but like you I will always challenge it and get it changed.

It most definetly isn't unlawful. If you are an employee it could be under certain circumstances but as a business it most definetly isn't

[privateeye]

Can you tell me if this is common in contracts? I found it to be unfair and think it might even be unlawful. Any advise?

Yes its common practice but like you I will always challenge it and get it changed.

[jamesc1]

Hi

I recently received a new 6 month contract where the notice period for the Agency was 28days, but for me it stated I was not allowed to give notice period and must work the full duration of the contract. I challenged this and was unwilling to sign so it was changed.

Can you tell me if this is common in contracts? I found it to be unfair and think it might even be unlawful. Any advise?