Reply to: Changing the terms mid contract

[v8gaz]

I agree with the above - get some legal advice, but there could be an opportunity to take the 2.5% hit on a better rate, if the client likes you and doesn't want to see you go.

I'd point out how unprofessional the new lot are by showing the client the annotated contract....

[quickweb]

If you have a direct contract with them, then you are an non-agency external supplier, providing your services to the company. Do the cleaners, couriers etc. have to also do this?

With a direct contract, this other company has no rights interferring with the relationship.

If your client wishes you to go through this new company then they have to do in a way that sticks to the contract: either serve notice, buy it out or generally come to an agreement with you.

But, IANAL.

[Mustang]

Maybe I am missing the point here but, by the fact that they want to give you a new contract with the intermediate 3rd party, aren't they in effect terminating the original contract? If that's the case, the negotiation on T's&C's (including renumeration) has to take place all over again.

Once again, professional legal advice required! Good luck!!

[lukemg]

Situations like this are always the same :
- If you are happy to leave, play hard b'stard, refuse to sign (especially with any kind of reduction in revenue) and leave it to them to fight it out/get rid of you. In the meantime - get back into finding work mode and f**k 'em.
- If you don't want to leave/can't, adopt a more reasonable approach, try to get ability to bail (not good for IR35 but sounds like you might need a parachute on this one), try to get rate increase to cover additional charges (not your choice to use these chumps).

Either way, remain very calm around the office, don't whinge to permies/your boss/other contractors about it, carry on working as usual. That way you remain the hassled and hard done to party being messed about through no fault of your own which should give you plenty of support in the office.

[AtW]

Was this before or after

These words have no meaning to someone with the Time Machine, especially so to threaded who has got at least 10.

[Bagpuss]

Was this before or after he worked on the Nobel prize and drove home in his AMG Mercedes 'Elegance' I think someone should tail him in a Ford Sierra 1.3 L Cosworth

[BoredBloke]

"When I was in this position I bought the company in question and shut it down just to make an example of them.

threaded."

and then placed all their staff in pies and ate them

[AtW]

When I was in this position I bought the company in question and shut it down just to make an example of them.

threaded.

[Bagpuss]

Thanks Mordac et al, not one sarcy off topic comment, what is going wrong?

[Mordac]

Try John Antell. You might have to google for him (he's in the west country somewhere, Marillion Fan has had some recent dealings with him) because he doesn't post here any more, but I reckon something like that would be right up his street.
Good luck, don't let the b@stards get away with this.

[Ardesco]

If you have a legally binding contract with them that doesn't have a notice period I belive the only way to get out of it is to buy you out of your contract.

You could always tell them that they will have to buy you out of your existing contract by giving you money to the value of your existing contract and then you will sign a new one with them, a few months pay for free sounds good!

But as i'm not a lawyer i may be talking tulipe. You'd need legal advice to see how cast iron your contract it and what you can get out of them.

[Bagpuss]

Thanks Mal, I'm bloody mad about this, need to calm down first and then as you say get legal advice. My feeling is I have agreed to the prior terms and conditions and now they are effectively reducing my rate by asking me to pay for their (supposed) cost cutting system.

[malvolio]

If you don't have a notice period, the contract stands to completion, you can't leave and your client will need to terminate you for some other reason. That rather implies they can't switch you to a new contract without your agreement (which I assume is not forthcoming).

All a bit nightmarish, potentially. Get proper legal advice sharpish before you decide anything - if you're in the PCG, give their legal helpline a bell first, else have a work with people like B&C or Lawspeed.

[BoredBloke]

If they are changing something as fundamental as the payment terms then I would say that the old contract would be dead in the water. They cannot significantly move the goal posts and still expect the other terms and conditions to hold true. If you do not sign then wouldn't it be a case of them giving you notice and not the other way around.

If you really don't want to play ball with them I'd hold off from signing up and look for something else in the meantime.

[Bagpuss]

What were the early termination provisions on your previous contract? E.g. 30 days to either party? If there is something like this, you are rather stuck with it, I'm afraid. Can't comment on the new Manco contract, but sounds like a stinker. Time to look elsewhere?

25 pages long, loads of caveats including refusal of payment after a fairly short period. Silly barstewards left some comments in the word doc between HR and Manco (including "This is legal although not really fair. The clause stays!'.

They had a presentation to sell it to us. Was a nice point in the PP presentation "Increasing supply of scarce resource" apparently by having a dutch auction. Here was me thinking as you moved down the price axis supply decreased, no apparently, a new economic law of Supply and Demand has been discovered.


PS I don't have a notice period in my current direct contract (for IR35 reasons)