Reply to: Giving notice

[tim123]

Ok - so why don't you show the agent complete loyalty????
They are after all a direct customer of yours with no middle man in the way...

Because they are in no position to guarentee me any extra work. All they can do is "keep in touch and put me forward". But they'll do this anyway, even if I tell them than I never ever want to deal with them again.

tim

[Denny]

Denny, I am not winding you up at all. All I am saying is that you should not take yourself so seriously. By all means take your industry seriously. If you are providing useful information (which often you do) dont go and ruin it by proclaiming yourself as being someone "who provides useful information". Why?
Because firstly it goes to your head and you begin to believe your own publicity and self importance, at which point your opinions become more about you than anything else (are you aiming for a career inpolitics by any chance?) . Secondly it is not your decision to proclaim that you are of importance to others.

You have a very self destructive and silly attitude towards agencies. Yes most of them (or should that read "us"?) are gel haired *******, but you make no attempt to understand the dynamics behind our existence. This makes you a bit daft. So when you go off on one of your "all agents are parasites and we are victims" rants this has the effect of:

1. Making contractors appear weak and pathetic. I mean for gods sake are we really so much superior to you guys???
2. Making you look an arse because you fail to understand basic laws of business (that if agencies were of no use they would not exist)
3. Making you look stupid because your generalisations are actually wrong; most agencies operate in strict accordance with the law and other legal requirements.

You as a person offer a great deal; you do not need to be so insecure, so eager to put others in their place. You are better than that.

On the contrary I actually believe that contractors are their own worst enemy when they adopt the 'roll over the die' mentality. I fully understand why agencies exist - they tell us they're there to source candidates for end-client roles when they are really much more useful than that - to erect a convenient barrier between the organisation and the candidate to ensure they can circumvent 'employment' law whenever they feel like it. Some unfortunately take advantage of this power.

My attitude toward EB's (not agencies) is in accordance with my experiences of them and my knowledge about how they operate as an industry - no more and no less.

Yes, you are right when you say that 'most agencies' (why most, do you have figures?) act according to the law and so on. The problem is not that they don't ever comply with the law. The problem is which ones do and when? How are we going to tell, or how can we ever tell, when they are all capable of adopting shady practices or good practices, depending of which way the wind blows that largely depends on targets being met, who's in control, staff turnover etc. For that reason, I don't and have never believed in the concept of the 'good and bad' agency.' It's the fundamental industry model in relation to contractors that's skewed not the individual practices of individual 'agencies.'

The problem with recruiters on this forum is that they like to instill in contractors that they're weaklings or moaners if they dare to highlight their bad experiences of the industry. The macho right wing culture of self interest is, to my mind, a sure tell tale sign that some are capable of deluding themselves and adopting a Stockholm Syndrome mentality which is further reinforced when they use 'agency' appeasing' language like 'they found me a job' or 'they sell us into a role' or other such bulltulip.

Those who can see the industry practices for what they are usually doing plenty of work through private clients.

[DodgyAgent]

OK, I know you are joking but only because I felt a bit stupid after taking this post so seriously. I thought you were serious this time round too and that there was a genuine misunderstanding about 'facts and opinions' rather than the wind up that it was leading to furious long winded responses from me which you must have been pissing yourself over. True I do take contractor issues seriously because they affect our livelihoods and people on here genuinely do need help and support rather than banter. I try to give that sincerely.

Actually, I do enjoy your posts most of the time even though we don't agree on much and I certainly enjoy a bit of winding up and a laugh too. I'm certainly not a humourless bore even though I am opinionated with strong views on some matters. I've even started doing a bit of winding up myself but usually on the 'general' forum.

I admit that this time it's DA - 1, Denny 0 (for not seeing through it earlier)

....but only this time, mind...

Denny, I am not winding you up at all. All I am saying is that you should not take yourself so seriously. By all means take your industry seriously. If you are providing useful information (which often you do) dont go and ruin it by proclaiming yourself as being someone "who provides useful information". Why?
Because firstly it goes to your head and you begin to believe your own publicity and self importance, at which point your opinions become more about you than anything else (are you aiming for a career inpolitics by any chance?) . Secondly it is not your decision to proclaim that you are of importance to others.

You have a very self destructive and silly attitude towards agencies. Yes most of them (or should that read "us"?) are gel haired *******, but you make no attempt to understand the dynamics behind our existence. This makes you a bit daft. So when you go off on one of your "all agents are parasites and we are victims" rants this has the effect of:

1. Making contractors appear weak and pathetic. I mean for gods sake are we really so much superior to you guys???
2. Making you look an arse because you fail to understand basic laws of business (that if agencies were of no use they would not exist)
3. Making you look stupid because your generalisations are actually wrong; most agencies operate in strict accordance with the law and other legal requirements.

You as a person offer a great deal; you do not need to be so insecure, so eager to put others in their place. You are better than that.

[Denny]

That is itself full of opinions which you passed off as facts. Such as

"Gordo isn't interested in taking an annual work status overall into account whether within the context of your own business marketing efforts or not. In other words, if most of what you do one year satisfies Gordo's IR35 exemption criteria and, say, you only had only short contract that wouldn't be IR35 exempt, they're not going to be generous and treat you overall as an IR35 exempt on everything you've done that year."

Which, if you have read the various cases (Lime IT being a fine example) turns out to be bollocks. IR35 status is very much about pointers, precisely because the Commissioners know what a load of cack the legislation is. How do you think the PCG have managed to accumulate a score of 1211 wins to 3 losses to date? By not listening to you, for starters.

Given the choice between trusting your judgement and trusting that of the PCG, no prizes for guessing where my money would be going.

Actually, I said in my 'helpful advice' thread that there was a combo of facts and opinions. I never said that everything was factually correct from a legal standpoint and I specifically pointed out that I was neither an accountant or a solicitor. However, I do think that my advice was generally sound. Just because I write in an authorative style that suggests to readers that I know and believe in what I am saying, that doesn't mean that I am passing off my own opinions as 'facts'. That is your misinterpretation. However, I have stated many facts about the way the recruitment industry model works that some individuals on this forum still find hard to accept for reasons of their own.

There may not be the difference of opinion between us that you seem to be highlighting. The point you raise about IR35 pointers is correct but only within not outside the context of a particular contract role. Therefore there is no contradiction at all.

My stance on your more general point is that Gordo is just waiting in the wings to claim back taxes from contractors who were deemed to be outside of IR35 when they aren't. There may be an accumulation of wins regarding the PGC's attempts to intervene and I'm glad that this is the case. I'm certainly not in favour of IR35 nor do I believe that the IR's criteria for 'own business' and 'psuedu employee' distinctions is remotely convincing. Clearly some solicitors are taking advantage of that for the benefit of contractors on an 'as of now ' basis to rake in the cash rather than on a 'as will be' basis when the government do win more cases. I just hope, as you do to, that this 'deal with it now and see how the cards fall' approach is the right route to take in the longer term.

As I said before, I prefer to advise contractors to play 'safe' by assuming that they are inside IR35 if they are in any doubt about their working arrangmeents and claim back any tax owing if they are later deemed to be outside rather than take unnecessary risks at great expense in terms of getting legal advice with no long term gains overall.

If your solicitor can convince you that you are OK with your terms, even if you don't know your own working conditions, then go with it. I just hope that you don't end up regretting it later, that's all. I know how unyielding the IR can be and they don't consider ignorance or wrong advice as being an excuse for not paying the right taxes. As I put in another thread, the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion is basically only what the IR think is expedient at any given time and how good someone's solicitor is.

I think we are different in our approach to dealing with the problem rather than we are different in our opinions on this more general matter.

[Mordac]

Please refer to my 'helpful advice' thread which I think would be a useful tool for this exercise.

That is itself full of opinions which you passed off as facts. Such as

"Gordo isn't interested in taking an annual work status overall into account whether within the context of your own business marketing efforts or not. In other words, if most of what you do one year satisfies Gordo's IR35 exemption criteria and, say, you only had only short contract that wouldn't be IR35 exempt, they're not going to be generous and treat you overall as an IR35 exempt on everything you've done that year."

Which, if you have read the various cases (Lime IT being a fine example) turns out to be bollocks. IR35 status is very much about pointers, precisely because the Commissioners know what a load of cack the legislation is. How do you think the PCG have managed to accumulate a score of 1211 wins to 3 losses to date? By not listening to you, for starters.

Given the choice between trusting your judgement and trusting that of the PCG, no prizes for guessing where my money would be going.

[Denny]

I have never knowingly put up anything useful on this site. I do not consider myself as the purveyor of all things useful from an agents point of view. This is one of the reasons why we are so different. You on the other hand piously proclaim that you provide useful information. This is not for you to judge unless you wish to be considered as a self important big head.

Are you related to Ben (sorry "sir") Kingsley by any chance.

Stop taking yourself so seriously

OK, I know you are joking but only because I felt a bit stupid after taking this post so seriously. I thought you were serious this time round too and that there was a genuine misunderstanding about 'facts and opinions' rather than the wind up that it was leading to furious long winded responses from me which you must have been pissing yourself over. True I do take contractor issues seriously because they affect our livelihoods and people on here genuinely do need help and support rather than banter. I try to give that sincerely.

Actually, I do enjoy your posts most of the time even though we don't agree on much and I certainly enjoy a bit of winding up and a laugh too. I'm certainly not a humourless bore even though I am opinionated with strong views on some matters. I've even started doing a bit of winding up myself but usually on the 'general' forum.

I admit that this time it's DA - 1, Denny 0 (for not seeing through it earlier)

....but only this time, mind...

[expat]

Stop taking yourself so seriously

Everybody needs something they believe in.

I believe I'll have another drink.

[DodgyAgent]

We're not.

If you wanted to engage in childish wind up banter instead of putting something useful up on the forum, your comments were more suited for the 'wind up' pages of 'general' not the serious pages for contracting or legal issues.

I am not amused by your pathetic attempt at humour.

I have never knowingly put up anything useful on this site. I do not consider myself as the purveyor of all things useful from an agents point of view. This is one of the reasons why we are so different. You on the other hand piously proclaim that you provide useful information. This is not for you to judge unless you wish to be considered as a self important big head.

Are you related to Ben (sorry "sir") Kingsley by any chance.

Stop taking yourself so seriously

[Denny]

I feel that we are getting somewhere

We're not.

If you wanted to engage in childish wind up banter instead of putting something useful up on the forum, your comments were more suited for the 'wind up' pages of 'general' not the serious pages for contracting or legal issues.

I am not amused by your pathetic attempt at humour.

[DodgyAgent]

Part of my my dispute with you Denny is that you claim what are actually opinions to be "facts" when they are nothing of the sort.

OK, it's my OPINION that recruiters contact organisations to do business with them to source candidates. That's not a FACT it's merely my opinion

OK, it's my OPINION that organisations get recruiters to source candidates and that it isn't the case that recruiters are hired by candidates to find them a job for which they get paid a fee.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that recruiters are paid a fee for candidates once they are on on site and that it's also my OPINION that recruiters take their mark up and pay candidates the agreed fee either directly through their limited or through their brolly.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that recruiter lawyers draft terms and conditions that are supposed to be a 'catch all contract' irrespective of what role a candidate is carrying out. Only by negotiation do these conditions change.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that some recruiters often send opt out notices to candidates that imply that representation is contingent upon them agreeing to opt out.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that recruiters won't agree to contractors freelancing as sole traders rather than limited companies or through a brolly.

It's also my OPINION that we live on a planet called Earth.

It's also my OPINION that Oxbridge is made up of Oxford University and Cambridge University.

It's also my OPINION that my forum name is spelt DENNY.

IT'S ACTUALLY MY 'opinion' THAT YOU HAVEN'T A CLUE WHAT A FACT IS. It's also a fact that what you claim are the facts you've presented about the candidate to recruiter relationship are not facts at all but are merely your phoney opinions that have no substance whatsoever.

Good, you clearly DO understand the difference between a fact and an opinion, although you have resorted to sarcasm to prove the point. Now answer my question as to where the facts are to support your pathetically childish attitude to clients who "dare" to use agencies.

I feel that we are getting somewhere

[Denny]

You might not like these guys but on at least one level they appeal to the customer and therefore pay for your mortgage, food etc... Learn to accept them and use them to your advantage.

It makes not a jot of difference whether I like 'them' or not. Who are 'them' anyway? My criticisms are about the recruitment industry model in relation to contractors and their end-clients, it's nothing at all to do with any personal gripes against individual 'recruiters.'

They don't pay for my mortgage and food. I do. I earn my fees through working on their client sites. What's more to the point, I earn their fees too by working on their client sites. Otherwise, if that were not the case, they would be paid for the work they undertake prior to me starting on site.

I don't know what 'accepting them' has to do with getting the facts straight about the recruiter to end-client relationship. Are you suggesting that because I prefer warm sunny days to cold rainy days I should always claim that the sun is shining outside when it clearly isn't?

Should I infer from your comments that I should agree that facts are my opinions just to keep in with recruiters?

If you read my previous post, I already said that won't do that.

[Denny]

Part of my my dispute with you Denny is that you claim what are actually opinions to be "facts" when they are nothing of the sort. I am not saying that I dont agree with much of what you say about IR35 and opting in/out, it is the confusion between facts and opinion.

Perhaps you can tell me where the facts are in this:

My point exactly. The bottom line is this: if recruiters are involved in the end-client to contractor relationship then we are merely commodities being provided by the recruiter. There is no loyalty lent to us at all either by recruiter or end-client.

I will bent over backwards to service my own gained clients even if the rate they're paying me isn't that great. I will go in at weekends, work late without pay and do extra tasks that wasn't part of my original remit. After all, I want them to ring me again for additonal work without me having the hassle of competing against other would be bods to do the same work.

When recruiters are involved the end-client has effectively said to me 'you are not someone I want to deal with directly and wish to dissasociate myself from you by whatever means possible.' That is not a good foundation to foster a good, loyal freelance service provider relationship.

As I said above: if you are still outside IR35 I will 'do what is necessary to get the job done well until the contract ends' if not outside IR35 I will behave as if I am an employee and stick by the rules and do the job until I need to leave whether that's sooner than the contracted period or not. What I won't do under any circumstances is treat the end-client as if they are my own clients that deserve some special kind of service and loyalty from me which I would never get from them in return. They're not our clients - period - and they don't want to be our clients so until they hire me directly that's exactly the way I will continue to act.

Part of my my dispute with you Denny is that you claim what are actually opinions to be "facts" when they are nothing of the sort.

OK, it's my OPINION that recruiters contact organisations to do business with them to source candidates. That's not a FACT it's merely my opinion

OK, it's my OPINION that organisations get recruiters to source candidates and that it isn't the case that recruiters are hired by candidates to find them a job for which they get paid a fee.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that recruiters are paid a fee for candidates once they are on on site and that it's also my OPINION that recruiters take their mark up and pay candidates the agreed fee either directly through their limited or through their brolly.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that recruiter lawyers draft terms and conditions that are supposed to be a 'catch all contract' irrespective of what role a candidate is carrying out. Only by negotiation do these conditions change.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that some recruiters often send opt out notices to candidates that imply that representation is contingent upon them agreeing to opt out.

OK, it's merely my OPINION that recruiters won't agree to contractors freelancing as sole traders rather than limited companies or through a brolly.

It's also my OPINION that we live on a planet called Earth.

It's also my OPINION that Oxbridge is made up of Oxford University and Cambridge University.

It's also my OPINION that my forum name is spelt DENNY.

IT'S ACTUALLY MY 'opinion' THAT YOU HAVEN'T A CLUE WHAT A FACT IS. It's also a fact that what you claim are the facts you've presented about the candidate to recruiter relationship are not facts at all but are merely your phoney opinions that have no substance whatsoever.

[boredsenseless]

My point exactly. The bottom line is this: if recruiters are involved in the end-client to contractor relationship then we are merely commodities being provided by the recruiter. There is no loyalty lent to us at all either by recruiter or end-client.

Okay so I don't completely agree with Denny here, but lets run with it anyway.

I accept that Big Bank Co that you are working for via Dodgy Agent are a client of the agent and not you, and therefore as you say you owe them no loyalty.

Ok - so why don't you show the agent complete loyalty????
They are after all a direct customer of yours with no middle man in the way...

The contracting game is simple, go after direct contracts, if they don't exist go to an agent and work with them to the best of your ability but always look for external opportunities. Once you've serviced your agent contract move on to the external option.

Remember people have a habit of being recycled I went to an interview once in my permie days where the new HR manager was the agent who had originally placed me.

You might not like these guys but on at least one level they appeal to the customer and therefore pay for your mortgage, food etc... Learn to accept them and use them to your advantage.

[DodgyAgent]

OK, you're on.


I'm putting myself on the line here - and I'm inviting you to 'shoot me down.'

I just hope you're up to the job.

Part of my my dispute with you Denny is that you claim what are actually opinions to be "facts" when they are nothing of the sort. I am not saying that I dont agree with much of what you say about IR35 and opting in/out, it is the confusion between facts and opinion.

Perhaps you can tell me where the facts are in this:

My point exactly. The bottom line is this: if recruiters are involved in the end-client to contractor relationship then we are merely commodities being provided by the recruiter. There is no loyalty lent to us at all either by recruiter or end-client.

I will bent over backwards to service my own gained clients even if the rate they're paying me isn't that great. I will go in at weekends, work late without pay and do extra tasks that wasn't part of my original remit. After all, I want them to ring me again for additonal work without me having the hassle of competing against other would be bods to do the same work.

When recruiters are involved the end-client has effectively said to me 'you are not someone I want to deal with directly and wish to dissasociate myself from you by whatever means possible.' That is not a good foundation to foster a good, loyal freelance service provider relationship.

As I said above: if you are still outside IR35 I will 'do what is necessary to get the job done well until the contract ends' if not outside IR35 I will behave as if I am an employee and stick by the rules and do the job until I need to leave whether that's sooner than the contracted period or not. What I won't do under any circumstances is treat the end-client as if they are my own clients that deserve some special kind of service and loyalty from me which I would never get from them in return. They're not our clients - period - and they don't want to be our clients so until they hire me directly that's exactly the way I will continue to act.

[Denny]

It is YOUR truth that you care about Denny. I dont believe in "nice balanced arguments" Denny, I believe in my own arguments but I am happy to accept arguments of others that may even have the effect of swaying my own arguments. Just look at what you said in your post, if you have a modicum of objectivity about you, you will see how ridiculous you look.

OK, you're on.

Tell me what important 'facts' I have got 'wrong' on issues we've debated recently that would undermine my credibility on this forum and would give rise to your opinions about me. I'm not talking here about silly jokes on the general forum about umbrella companies and 'umbrella dispensations' or odd typos or overzealous statements that I've modified soon afterwards. I know I've made a few of those too which has given rise to some misunderstanding about my position because they were carelessly stated. I'm particularly referring to is the recruitment industry model and the way that it operates. Please refer to my 'helpful advice' thread which I think would be a useful tool for this exercise.

I'm putting myself on the line here - and I'm inviting you to 'shoot me down.'

I just hope you're up to the job.