Reply to: Whose loss it is?

[Ignis Fatuus]

You, for using the phrase "telephonic interview"

Entretien téléphonique.

Simple(s)!

[Wanderer]

All they have to do is say to their members they are looking to take an unreasonable 'handcuff' clause forward as a test case. I'd have thought they wouldnt be short of takers.

I'd be interested to see this happen too. The trouble is that the agency would just back down in the face of the big guns for fear of setting a precedent and upsetting their whole way of doing business. If the restraint of trade works in 90% of the cases then they will be happy enough with that. You can't win 'em all and if you get some angry little bastard then you just back down.

Of course the PCG could take a few cases on and publish them as case studies: Took on agency "X" with restraint of trade clause "Y" and they backed down. Eventually the agencies would have to stand up and fight...

[TheFaQQer]

Who is the bigger loser?

You, for using the phrase "telephonic interview"

[BolshieBastard]

Bit tricky to change contract law though, isn't it? And how do you propose they fight a court case that hasn't happened?

The problem is the OP's to resolve, as I said earler. The handcuff can't be applied if there's no reasonable expectation of income, which is the position the agency have put themselves in.

Hasnt stopped them trying to get IR35 changed. Hasnt stopped them taking on 'test' cases.

All they have to do is say to their members they are looking to take an unreasonable 'handcuff' clause forward as a test case. I'd have thought they wouldnt be short of takers.

[Wanderer]

I don't think the OP is tied to the agency at all. The problem is that ClientCo are bound the agency, although whether this is because of explicit legal reasons - or they simply can't be arsed to engage direct/go through another agency is unclear.

The client is not bound by the 6 or 12 month restraint of trade unless the contractor opted out of the agency regulations.

You are right though - if the client doesn't want to have the fight then that's the end of it really. The contractor has to do what they say.

[rd409]

Am I the only one wondering what this 'new' technology is?

The "New" (?) technology is Amazon Web Services. It is not so new in US, but has just started picking up in UK. Not many developers in UK and the Bob's code is crap. So am living a dream at the moment.

[centurian]

If the agency are only taking about 10% then they are most likely on the preferred suppliers list so you would probably end up working though them anyway.

After 6 months you aren't tied to any agency though, you can do whatever you like. That's presuming you declined to sign the opt out they sent you.....

I don't think the OP is tied to the agency at all. The problem is that ClientCo are bound the agency, although whether this is because of explicit legal reasons - or they simply can't be arsed to engage direct/go through another agency is unclear.

[Wanderer]

Now after about 6 months, I am looking for a new role, and thought I should approach the client and inform them about my availability. Did it, and the end client insisted that I should come through the agency as they were the ones who initiated the contact some time ago.

If the agency are only taking about 10% then they are most likely on the preferred suppliers list so you would probably end up working though them anyway.

After 6 months you aren't tied to any agency though, you can do whatever you like. That's presuming you declined to sign the opt out they sent you.....

[ChimpMaster]

Am I the only one wondering what this 'new' technology is?

[malvolio]

This should be something the lardarses at PCG should be taking to court instead of swaning about thinking they are the contractors best buddy!

Bit tricky to change contract law though, isn't it? And how do you propose they fight a court case that hasn't happened?

The problem is the OP's to resolve, as I said earler. The handcuff can't be applied if there's no reasonable expectation of income, which is the position the agency have put themselves in.

[BolshieBastard]

Agents really piss me off. As they didnt get you this role, I dont see why they think they should be able to negotiate down the rate you have agreed with the client. A 6 month handcuff is long enough and to be frank, I think they'd have a hard job arguing it in court.

This should be something the lardarses at PCG should be taking to court instead of swaning about thinking they are the contractors best buddy!

[d000hg]

Talk to the client again. Be very clear; "If you want my services, I want £xxx a day. Can you agree that with the agency please."

WHS. Go back to the client and tell them the agency is playing silly buggers.

[malvolio]

I am not worried about what the agent is earning. The issue was the rate was offered for £ x in the advert, which was 10% below my minimum. I was okay with that, as it meant an easy transition. This is the case right now, as I don't mind getting the contract at £x per day, as this would mean that I would be in the money for quite some time. The problem is the agent was initially asking me to accept £x - 50, but then increased it to £x - 35 last time. This time he says that the role would only be for £ x - 100.

The conversation during the interview revealed to me that the end client is happy with £x + Agent's commission, which was around 10%. Now the agent is just trying to add this £100 per day to his commission which is already a good 10%, which I am not ready to sacrifice as I have already taken 10% cut, and I am not ready to bend over just for the sake of getting this contract. I mentioned this whole situation to the end client while approaching this time, as I thought they may be able to put some pressure on the agent. But it seems that the agent thinks he can get away with this kind of attitude.

Talk to the client again. Be very clear; "If you want my services, I want £xxx a day. Can you agree that with the agency please."

What rate you get is the important bit. Let the agency fight their own battles. If they prevent you going in at a rate agreeable to the client by buggering around with their margin, then they can't impose a handcuff since they have no business to lose, and you can go with an agent that actually wants to do business.

You're the one with the product to sell here, nobody else.

[rd409]

Well I see it as a cock up on your part, from what I read if you hadn't found out this other guy is on £300 a day you would have signed the contract at £280 and been content, you were fortunate that you found another contract so easily.

My advice for the future is don't worry about someone elses rate, I know there are people at my gig who are on more that me but I am on a fair whack that I am happy with, and its a lot more than I was one as a permie

I am not worried about what the agent is earning. The issue was the rate was offered for £ x in the advert, which was 10% below my minimum. I was okay with that, as it meant an easy transition. This is the case right now, as I don't mind getting the contract at £x per day, as this would mean that I would be in the money for quite some time. The problem is the agent was initially asking me to accept £x - 50, but then increased it to £x - 35 last time. This time he says that the role would only be for £ x - 100.

The conversation during the interview revealed to me that the end client is happy with £x + Agent's commission, which was around 10%. Now the agent is just trying to add this £100 per day to his commission which is already a good 10%, which I am not ready to sacrifice as I have already taken 10% cut, and I am not ready to bend over just for the sake of getting this contract. I mentioned this whole situation to the end client while approaching this time, as I thought they may be able to put some pressure on the agent. But it seems that the agent thinks he can get away with this kind of attitude.

[SimonMac]

Well I see it as a cock up on your part, from what I read if you hadn't found out this other guy is on £300 a day you would have signed the contract at £280 and been content, you were fortunate that you found another contract so easily.

My advice for the future is don't worry about someone elses rate, I know there are people at my gig who are on more that me but I am on a fair whack that I am happy with, and its a lot more than I was one as a permie