Pre Employment Screening/Vetting

[northernladuk]

The thing that is making this thread a mess for me is the poor terminology the OP using. Doing some basic checks and references which we all contracts tend to do to some extent is completely differen to being vetted by an external credit company for financial contractors or even security vetting. Some can be done before the contract arrives but some will expect you to sign and start before vetting is complete.

I think we are comparing apples with pears here until the OP comes back with a better explaination of his situation.

[bassy]

To be honest I am in about the same position as you at the moment (anyone noticed that contracts are like buses - nothing for a couple of weeks then two or three come along at once). Got offered a contract on Monday (contract A) subject to references and checks and told me that they hoped I could start the following Monday. I did the usual "subject to contract" business - sent off the references etc and not heard a thing off them since (I did ask about when the contract would come out and was told once all the references had been received and checked). In the meantime I have carried on looking as a) it could have fallen apart b)my references could hate me and surprise surprise got offered another contract this morning (Contract B) on a much higher rate (approx £100 a day more) and doing the type of work I really want to do.

Contract B have already emailed me a contract and then a couple of hours later I get an email from Contract A to say that they are expecting me on Monday but they cant issue me a contract as not all the checks have come back yet. So I have no idea what the contract terms are for Contract A as they wont raise the contract till next week. Now whilst I hate letting people down I had said last monday that I needed to look at the contract and if they really wanted me then they should have sent the blasted thing out earlier.

So I am having to blow off Contract A (which will probably annoy an agent and a potential client) - but if they want me to start without all checks being completed then surely they could issue a contract without all checks being completed. To be honest I now work on the same premise as my Plan B - someone wants me for a date then I am not booked until something is signed and I get a deposit (ok in contracting I wont get the deposit but the rest holds). In your case I would have done the same - until there is actually a contract in hand and you agree to its terms then you are a free agent - at the end of the day though both might come back agreeable there may be terms in one contract that you would never agree to and they refuse to change.

[Ignis Fatuus]

Recently I was in the fortunate position of being offerred 2 contracts on the same day, unfortunately, both subject to pre-employment screening. This left me with the dilema, do I accept one, but run the risk that I might fail the screening and end up jobless or do I accept both, knowing full well that 3 weeks down the road, having passed all the checks, I am going to let one of the Clients down.

In the end I had no choice, other than to accept both and see what transpired. This went very much against my usual levels of professionalism, but what choice did I have? Part of me feels that as a contractor, I should accept this as part and parcel of the job and have reject one of the offers from the outset.

Another part of me thinks that if the Client wants to introduced these enhanced checks, that we've done perfectly well without for the last 25 years I've freelanced, then they should run the risk of losing a potential contractor to another offer that comes along in the interim. While this may sound selfish and unprofessional, it strikes me as being better than ending up without a contract and having to start the whole process from scratch.

I'm not sure there is a right answer, so I'd be interested to know how others feel about this situation.

It is actually really simple. You stop canvassing for business when you have a definite contract - not before.

A conditional contract doesn't stop you looking for others. If a prospective client wants you to stop looking for other clients, there's a very simple way for them to get that result - sign a contract with you, not subject to any conditions.

[northernladuk]

I was under the impression he would have to sign before they started checks to be honest. I started on 2 of my finance clients while they did the checks. We have also had a couple of posts about people failing checks and being walked off site. Some checks in to history, particularly if he hasn't worked for a period can take a number of weeks

[Willapp]

I think you've done the right thing. Until there is a signed contract there is no obligation on either party to proceed - the client could just as easily withdraw their offer so I wouldn't even feel guilty about it.

At the end of the day it's your responsibility as a director of your LTD to act in the best interest of your business and if that means provisionally accepting two contracts knowing that you might have to drop one of them, so be it. Better that than you drop one from the outset only to lose the other one and end up with nothing.

[BolshieBastard]

Recently I was in the fortunate position of being offerred 2 contracts on the same day, unfortunately, both subject to pre-employment screening. This left me with the dilema, do I accept one, but run the risk that I might fail the screening and end up jobless or do I accept both, knowing full well that 3 weeks down the road, having passed all the checks, I am going to let one of the Clients down.

In the end I had no choice, other than to accept both and see what transpired. This went very much against my usual levels of professionalism, but what choice did I have? Part of me feels that as a contractor, I should accept this as part and parcel of the job and have reject one of the offers from the outset.

Another part of me thinks that if the Client wants to introduced these enhanced checks, that we've done perfectly well without for the last 25 years I've freelanced, then they should run the risk of losing a potential contractor to another offer that comes along in the interim. While this may sound selfish and unprofessional, it strikes me as being v=better than ending up without a contract and having to start the whole p-rocess from scratch.

I'm not sure there is a right answer, so I'd be interested to know how others feel about this situation.

Hmmm. Not sure I totally agree with NLUK here given the current state of the market which is dog eat dog. When contracts opportunities are plentiful, we can afford to be more professional but right now, needs must.

Until it comes to signing the actual contract, I think we have to play agents \ clients at their own game. I've had clients tell me in interviews I have the job and 'we'll see you Monday!' only for them to withdraw the offer before Monday.

As I say, it cuts both ways.

Regarding the checks, well, I think clients, especially financial ones, need these check for regulatory reasons although much of the stuff hacks me off and seems OTT.

[northernladuk]

Recently I was in the fortunate position of being offerred 2 contracts on the same day, unfortunately, both subject to pre-employment screening. This left me with the dilema, do I accept one, but run the risk that I might fail the screening and end up jobless or do I accept both, knowing full well that 3 weeks down the road, having passed all the checks, I am going to let one of the Clients down.

The first is an option, the second shouldn't be. To be fair you missed the option that if you fail one you are likely to fail the other.

In the end I had no choice, other than to accept both and see what transpired. This went very much against my usual levels of professionalism, but what choice did I have? Part of me feels that as a contractor, I should accept this as part and parcel of the job and have reject one of the offers from the outset. [/quote]

You did have a choice and you made the wrong one IMO. You talk about professionalism and then throw it out the window when it suited you. The choice was take a contract and get your checks done. As mentioned it before if you fail one you will fail both, if you pass one you will pass both. If you don't have anything to hide it should just be a trivial issue. Yes you should have rejected one but as already pointed out your terms employment and jobless do not indicate a contractor.

Another part of me thinks that if the Client wants to introduced these enhanced checks, that we've done perfectly well without for the last 25 years I've freelanced, then they should run the risk of losing a potential contractor to another offer that comes along in the interim. While this may sound selfish and unprofessional, it strikes me as being v=better than ending up without a contract and having to start the whole p-rocess from scratch.

It sounds extremely selfish and unprofessional and on top of the short sighted and small minded. Things change in 25 years, just because you are stuck in the past it doesn't mean business are, particularly with online systems and levels of fraud nowadays. Very poor.

I'm not sure there is a right answer, so I'd be interested to know how others feel about this situation.

THere may not be but what you did is most definitely not it IMO.

You

[Gentile]

If there's no unconditional contract offer in place, there's no problem, because there's no obligation on either party to proceed. I'd be more concerned at your use of the phrase "pre-employment". If you're truly contracting, they're not employing you.

[TheVoiceOfReason]

Recently I was in the fortunate position of being offerred 2 contracts on the same day, unfortunately, both subject to pre-employment screening. This left me with the dilema, do I accept one, but run the risk that I might fail the screening and end up jobless or do I accept both, knowing full well that 3 weeks down the road, having passed all the checks, I am going to let one of the Clients down.

In the end I had no choice, other than to accept both and see what transpired. This went very much against my usual levels of professionalism, but what choice did I have? Part of me feels that as a contractor, I should accept this as part and parcel of the job and have reject one of the offers from the outset.

Another part of me thinks that if the Client wants to introduced these enhanced checks, that we've done perfectly well without for the last 25 years I've freelanced, then they should run the risk of losing a potential contractor to another offer that comes along in the interim. While this may sound selfish and unprofessional, it strikes me as being v=better than ending up without a contract and having to start the whole p-rocess from scratch.

I'm not sure there is a right answer, so I'd be interested to know how others feel about this situation.