Longer contract term offered during negotiations

[jmo21]

Strangely enough, the agencies quoted in this CUK article agree that a longer-term contract at a lower rate is better than getting paid what you want from the start:



I'm surprised

I assume you're being sarcastic? An agency proffers the opinion that lower rates are better?

[TheFaQQer]

Agents just love the gullible!

Strangely enough, the agencies quoted in this CUK article agree that a longer-term contract at a lower rate is better than getting paid what you want from the start:

Reed has seen a similar pattern. It cautioned: “Consider more than just the rate of pay of a contract. The length of a contract can often be more important when looking for an element of job security. For many [candidates], a longer contract on a slightly lower rate of pay will often be preferable.”

I'm surprised

[myso]

Maybe Kanye's pont isn't entirely without merit in the repect that the wheels might be slightly better greased towards the agreed, longer term? Afterall inaction is always the default and I can think of a good few business models founded on that very principle.

Nevertheless, thanks all for confirming my initial thoughts that real money beats the hell out of theoretical money any day.

[BolshieBastard]

I disagree with this for an extent. Contract renewals are always a bit of a stumbling block where you need to get the right signatures and the right approvals.

Knowing how big companies work, I'd take a slight hit on day rate for a year contract over 4 x 3 months or 2 x 6 months.

Agents just love the gullible!

[northernladuk]

I disagree with this for an extent. Contract renewals are always a bit of a stumbling block where you need to get the right signatures and the right approvals.

Knowing how big companies work, I'd take a slight hit on day rate for a year contract over 4 x 3 months or 2 x 6 months.

Hang around here long enough and see how many people recently are being given notice and indeed the number of people that are being finished without out notice and you would see the above isn't a given.

As FaQQer says, the contract is for as long as the client needs you. Taking a hit on the rate becuase 6 months looks nicer on a piece of paper is up to you. If it makes you sleep at night then go for it. It will only take one contract to be pulled from under you when you are on the lower rate to make sure you will never do it again.

[TheFaQQer]

i've just landed my first contract and am now negotiating the rate with the agent. She has gone a little towards what I've asked for and said that the client would also be willing to offer a longer term up front.

If that made any sense (rather than the agent thinking that this makes sense!), then you'd push for an even higher rate and a much shorter contract

A contract is for as long as you want to be there and the client wants you to be there.

[Kanye]

I disagree with this for an extent. Contract renewals are always a bit of a stumbling block where you need to get the right signatures and the right approvals.

Knowing how big companies work, I'd take a slight hit on day rate for a year contract over 4 x 3 months or 2 x 6 months.

[myso]

What is the notice period? Can they give you notice but you can't give them? Does it have a Mutuality of Obligation clause? Have you had it checked by QDOS.

Haven't seen the contract yet, but definitely intend getting it checked by QDOS as I'm a complete greenhorn at all this.

Cheers.

[northernladuk]

What is the notice period? Can they give you notice but you can't give them? Does it have a Mutuality of Obligation clause? Have you had it checked by QDOS.

In short though you are absolutely correct.

The length of a contract is fairly irrelevant as they can invoke notice on you or MOO if there is no work (so you are in contract but not getting paid. You could say the length of any contract, regardless of what you signed for, is as long as the client wants you. To be fair though the last 6 or so gigs have lasted as long as the client said. They will also be willing to extend you if they need to as well.
Personally I would not take a longer term contract as a benefit and would most definately fall for the 6 months longer for £10 less aday marlarky.

[kingcook]

i've just landed my first contract and am now negotiating the rate with the agent. She has gone a little towards what I've asked for and said that the client would also be willing to offer a longer term up front.

My question is whether or not the longer term is actually worth anything? My thinking is that they could show me the door any time no matter how long the contract is if they're unhappy or the work has dried up. Conversely if there's more work and they're happy, I would get offered a renewal anyway.

You are correct - the longer term is not worth anything, for the reasons you gave.

Just tell the agent that your rate is £x, and that if she tries to haggle you down, just say something like "have a think about it, and give me a call when you're willing to accept £x as the rate".

Or... give in and just accept whatever she is offering.

Remember that she has highly likely already agreed the client-to-agency rate. She is just trying to skim a few extra £££ off for herself.

[myso]

i've just landed my first contract and am now negotiating the rate with the agent. She has gone a little towards what I've asked for and said that the client would also be willing to offer a longer term up front.

My question is whether or not the longer term is actually worth anything? My thinking is that they could show me the door any time no matter how long the contract is if they're unhappy or the work has dried up. Conversely if there's more work and they're happy, I would get offered a renewal anyway.