2 contractors bite the bullet

[Dundeegeorge]

Well it's a good non-IR35 pointer I suppose

I would suppose that there is something in there about the agent being able to terminate the contract without notice if the client no longer requires the contractor's services?

but surely the agency can be sued for fraud, after all, they never had 6 months to offer the supplier, but nonetheless signed a contract (you know, legally binding document) to the effect that they did?

[premiere]

I would suppose that there is something in there about the agent being able to terminate the contract without notice if the client no longer requires the contractor's services?

Indeed there is.

[expat]

But was the contract not for 6 months?
Bit of tough tulip for the agent, but the agency contract with the client is not really relevant to the agency's contract with the supplier.
On what grounds would the agency be able to disregard the contract, just because they f*cked up? Surely there must be some kind of legal recompense available to those suppliers who signed a contract in good faith for six months.

I would suppose that there is something in there about the agent being able to terminate the contract without notice if the client no longer requires the contractor's services?

[donaldduke]

I can't understand why contractors don't ask "how long an initial contrat are you offering" at the interview (sorry, sales presentation).

tim

Another one to ask: "How much has the agency put me in at".

This will normally be on the cover of the CV. And you might see it as you
walk into the room or when its in the interviewers hand. Or when they leave
the room to get you a drink or when they leave while you do a technical test.

But if you dont get a chance to see it you can just ask..

[Dundeegeorge]

Confused of confusedville in some confusion

But was the contract not for 6 months?
Bit of tough tulip for the agent, but the agency contract with the client is not really relevant to the agency's contract with the supplier.
On what grounds would the agency be able to disregard the contract, just because they f*cked up? Surely there must be some kind of legal recompense available to those suppliers who signed a contract in good faith for six months.

[tim123]

I can't understand the EBs thinking is behind this. Probably because there is no thought that went into the consequences of lying to a contractor.

I can't understand why contractors don't ask "how long an initial contrat are you offering" at the interview (sorry, sales presentation).

tim

[bobhope]

It's kind of depressing to hear the same old tricks by the pimps. Someone in a minute will suggest that there should be some kind of blacklist, but of course due to legal stuff it would never fly. So, how about a whitelist? I'll go first. After 8 years contracting with perhaps half a dozen agents, I thoroughly recommend:

1)

[donaldduke]

I once did a contract through Regressive.
It was originally sold to me on the phone as a six month contract.
Now i didnt care as i was happy to accept a three month contract, but i got the impression this was her standard line when anyone asked.

Its probably the case that if i had turned down the contract on this basis after the interview the same scam would have been pulled on me.

They are most unprofessional agents i have used in my six years as a contrator. Even the client got fed up with them and didnt want to use them anymore (for another unprofessional scam they pulled, i wont go into the details except the client found out their cut of the total daily rate and it was alot more than what the client had agreed with them before hand).

Best avoided unless you are desperate.

[milanbenes]

very nicely put Joe

seconded.

Milan.

[Joe Black]

What difference does it make whether or not a contract is for six months or three months? A client can terminate any time they want anyway, whether the contract was for an intial three month period or six.

True, but it's also generally an indication of intent.

Faced with client A who says he's planning a big project expected to take 6 months or client B who wants you in and out as fast as possible and is suggesting 3 months, then most people will of course go for the former.

Of course client A's project could be cancelled, and likewise B's could grow into something else. As you mention though the problem is more the mis-representation of what was intended.

In my experience, with a few exceptions, contracts offered for a certain period have generally as a minimum kept to that, usually because it means a budget has been approved for the entire period.

[Denny]

I've heard that happen a few times. The agency knows full well that its a 3 month contract but sells it to the contractor as a 6 month one knowing that it's far easier to sell a six month contract than a 3 month one. The agency will not be pi55ed off as they knew this was going to happen all along.

I can't understand the EBs thinking is behind this. Probably because there is no thought that went into the consequences of lying to a contractor.

What difference does it make whether or not a contract is for six months or three months? A client can terminate any time they want anyway, whether the contract was for an intial three month period or six. If they want to extend a contract after three months they can offer an extension which looks better on any candidate CV as it implies that the contractor has done a good job.

I can't see any good contractor turning down a three-monther if it's at the right price. Plus a three monther gives them the chance to leave if they don't want to stay, for whatever reason. There's nothing worse than having a long contract if you decide after a month or two you can't stand the job.

I always ask for short contracts, particularly for a new client I've not worked with before. EBs have often asked me if I wanted a six monther to begin with and I usually say no - a three month contract with an extension is far better choice, I feel as I have everything to gain and nothing to lose. Plus I can negotiate a higher rate if the contract is shorter.

[Francko]

2 contractors here (through same agency as me...rhymes with depressive)

[BoredBloke]

I've heard that happen a few times. The agency knows full well that its a 3 month contract but sells it to the contractor as a 6 month one knowing that it's far easier to sell a six month contract than a 3 month one. The agency will not be pi55ed off as they knew this was going to happen all along.

[premiere]

2 contractors here (through same agency as me...rhymes with depressive) have just discovered they both have only 1 month left on their contracts.

Turns out the agency signed them up for 6 months, but the end client has only 3 month deals with the agency!!! and doesn't want to renew them.

Agent is pi55ed off and so are both contractors.

I have checked with HR here...phew...mine is OK. Signed for another 6 months (renewal)...end client - agency is 6 months...unless they terminate