Reply to: First timer - Dual agents for same contract - how to remove one?

[northernladuk]

You should work with my client. They'll show you how wrong that statement is.

You are on top form today TF!

[TheFaQQer]

There are no dumb questions

You should work with my client. They'll show you how wrong that statement is.

[Wanderer]

Still possible to ask a dumb question even if you are new.

There are no dumb questions, only dumb answers.

[northernladuk]

Hi there
answering a post by saying the guy was a bit dumb doesn't help - the OP did say he's new to contracting.

Still possible to ask a dumb question even if you are new.

HTH

[jimbo45]

Hi there
answering a post by saying the guy was a bit dumb doesn't help - the OP did say he's new to contracting.

Unfortunately more and more work particularly with some of the bigger clients is done via consultancy firms like Cap gemini, Accenture, PWC etc and you as a contractor get called by an agency who supplies you to one of these consultancies who then supply you to THEIR end client - so TWO sets of snouts in the trough before you get your money.

It seems quite hard to actually get a contract with the end client without having to have one of these "consultancy firms" in the middle - although it is possible.

What you should avoid at all costs though those rare occasions where there is even a 3rd agency in the chain - happens but is rare -- this can crop up if an agency supplying a contractor to a consultancy has been suddenly let down.

The take on all this stuff is you shouldn't worry what another person is getting paid on the gig you are currently signed up to -- if you agreed the rate that's it -- you could however if the end client wants to keep you re-negotiate the rate -- although the consultancy in the middle won't budge usually that's not your problem -- any side deals they have with the consultancy is THEIR problem -- if they really make a song and dance about paying a higher rate and you KNOW others at the SAME site are getting paid more then I'd leave anyway as it shows you are more marketable.

That said - I really try and avoid contracts that go via Consultancies -- as these people - unlike an end client - have no regard for their contractors -- I know one guy recently who had signed up for a 6 month gig over in Holland through a large International Computing firm as the "intermediate" consultancy -- and on the Friday before he was due to start on the Monday they just cancelled the contract - even though the poor guy had booked ferries and Hotels for the first week. He'd of course turned down a couple of 3 month gigs thinking (quite naturally) that a 6 month deal was better than a 3 month deal.

You should always ask your agency if the contract is through a consultancy or with an end client before deciding on whether to accept the gig.

Cheers
jimbo

[malvolio]

A quick update...

It ended up being a lot less painful that I expected. A cordial chat followed by an agreed lump sum figure and I effectively bought out the 'handcuff' clause to allow me to contract with the upper agency at a much higher rate.

All in all a good result for everyone.

Well done. But how long do you have to work at the higher rate before you recover the lump sum?

[yozdag]

A quick update...

It ended up being a lot less painful that I expected. A cordial chat followed by an agreed lump sum figure and I effectively bought out the 'handcuff' clause to allow me to contract with the upper agency at a much higher rate.

All in all a good result for everyone.

[BlasterBates]

Your only real choice is either accept or go else where. Why don't you just pitch your wares and see if you can get a higher rate.

As others say you shouldn't decide based on what the guy next to you is earning or what the agency margin is, it's what you can charge on the open market. If you're underpaid you'll have a new contract in a jiffy.

Agency B was charging a low margin but it is obviously Agency A doing all the marketing otherwise you'd be direct with agency B.

I had a long contract where the agency took 30% but it was the best rate I've ever had. I've subsequently had a contract with an agency on about 5% and I was on the lowest rate ever.

There is often little correlation between margin and your rate. What contractors forget is that the client too can take a chunk out of your income.

The key is what is the best offer you can get on the market, not which agent takes the lowest margin. The most active agents who are marketing themselves will be taking higher margins.

[Wanderer]

Your threat to walk if they don't agree won't carry much weight if you're in a role where they can easily replace you (with someone less troublesome ) so factor that into your decision whether to make that threat or not.

The agency that is taking the biggest chunk of the commission is unlikely to get a new candidate into the client because they aren't on the preferred suppliers list so it's not a certainly that a contractor leaving would be immediately replaced by the same agency or even on the same fat margin.

How your agent does their business and what their margins are etc is none of your business.

Finding out that some agency is taking a fat markup will always result in me going back to the negotiating table. That's just good business, I don't understand why people are so shy about this. In this situation there is at least some room to negotiate a cut in the agents margin here if not remove them completely.

[MyUserName]

I think you have muddled the picture for yourself with too much information.

How your agent does their business and what their margins are etc is none of your business.

Do not worry about what others are getting, even if they are telling you the truth you do not have the complete picture. They might have specialist skills, be inside IR35 so have wrangled more etc.

You were happy with your rate, what has changed? Others tell you that they are on more? So what? Someone somewhere always will be. Just think about your rate, your expenses, your business etc.

You want to increase your rate than go ahead and ask the agency. Do not bluff as they will smell it a mile off and will not take you seriously. You mention that you are new to contracting? Any reason why the agency will not just terminate you and pick from some other experienced contractors who are not going to cause hassle?

[DynoDad]

Don't try to second guess how much the agency will want - ask them. It's just business, it's all about the numbers, and they don't care if you work for them or anyone else, so long as they get paid. And there's nothing wrong with that.

You know how much the agency will from your renewal over the contract period, and the amount they will want will be more than that if there's a prospect of a further renewal, possibly double. That's not unreasonable, there has to be something in it for them to let you go, otherwise they're better off saying no. They have little involvement with the actual contract so there's not much cost in keeping you.

Your threat to walk if they don't agree won't carry much weight if you're in a role where they can easily replace you (with someone less troublesome ) so factor that into your decision whether to make that threat or not.

It's a simple equation then, will you make more by paying off your current agency and going with the one higher up the chain? The trouble is you have to take a guess on how long the contract will run to really answer that question.

I bought myself out of an agency contract about 8 years ago to go direct with the client (Ltd Co). The company paid a year's worth of commission to agent to buy me out, I got a small increase in rate, and the company saved money because they weren't paying the rather large commission the agency was taking. In the end I stayed a further three years until the end of the contract so it was a good decision all round. It may be that the top level agency would be happy to buy you out of your current contract on the same basis, just depends how forward looking they want to be.

[Wanderer]

In theory yes. In practice - how many clients will let a needed contractor disappear for a couple of months just to rearrange a contractual chain that is of no interest to them, I wonder?

Good point, though I've taken 5 or 6 weeks off mid contract. Every one would be different though.

Incidentally, the clause in the Regs is about moving from temp worker to perm employment, not about changing the contract.

I was thinking of section 10(4) of the agency conduct regulations which refers to the following situations:

(a)taking up employment with the hirer;
(b)taking up employment with any person (other than the hirer) to whom the hirer has introduced him; or
(c)working for the hirer pursuant to being supplied by another employment business,

[malvolio]

I think everyone agrees that it's almost certain that the OP won't be allowed to stop working for agency B and start working for agency A without some sort of payoff to agency B.

I was just saying that it could be possible for a non opt-out contractor to threaten the nuclear option whereby they take an 8 week break and then return to work for the client through any agency they choose thus removing agency B from the relationship whether they like it or not.

In theory yes. In practice - how many clients will let a needed contractor disappear for a couple of months just to rearrange a contractual chain that is of no interest to them, I wonder? Incidentally, the clause in the Regs is about moving from temp worker to perm employment, not about changing the contract.

[Wanderer]

What has that to do with the contract between Agencies A and B then? Nobody's saying the OP can't work, so exclusion clauses are irrelevant.

I think everyone agrees that it's almost certain that the OP won't be allowed to stop working for agency B and start working for agency A without some sort of payoff to agency B.

I was just saying that it could be possible for a non opt-out contractor to threaten the nuclear option whereby they take an 8 week break and then return to work for the client through any agency they choose thus removing agency B from the relationship whether they like it or not.

[malvolio]

Even if the restriction is in the contract, The Agency Conduct Regulations prevents it from being enforced if the worker didn't opt out. Remember that this legislation regulates the Agency in all their dealings, not just their dealings with the worker.

What has that to do with the contract between Agencies A and B then? Nobody's saying the OP can't work, so exclusion clauses are irrelevant. And if you wave the Agency Regs around, there is a minimum 8 week window in there anyway and it's only limiting the period in which the agency can apply a charge for the move, it's nothing to do with the restriction itself, nor any other overarching contractual agreements.