Reply to: Ericsson 2 Year rule for contractors

[Smartie]

A lot of contractors feel that way but we are all dispensable.

Except it often is their loss. They lose skills and knowledge that won't be replicated by a new contractor and will rarely pay sufficient to get a perm resource of the same quality.
Faced with this dilemma and the loss of the majority of their resources within a short time period, my current client handed the roles off to a resourcing company who hired everyone (who wanted to) as perm on the same income as their contract rates delivered.

[TheDude]

Still it's their loss so onwards and uplwards

A lot of contractors feel that way but we are all dispensable.

[Snooky]

As mentioned elsewhere, there's no "official" 2 year rule, different clients will have different policies. The whole thing came about as a result of IR35 where, if you were found to be an employee for tax purposes, some companies were concerned that you might have a valid claim for backdated employee rights. 2 years service is a kind of trigger point for enhanced employee rights, particularly in terms of redundancy so, AIUI, that's where the 2 year policy came from. Other organisations then seem to have fairly blindly adopted the practice.

[NotAllThere]

For some companies, permanent roles are head count, contractors are not. Head count freezes are good news for contractors.

[edison]

Was told the same. Guess what they did, got another contractor in after.

I worked at one medium size client where I brought in a rule that all contractor roles would be reviewed quarterly by the IT leadership team as a whole. Initially all contractors who had been there for at least two years were reviewed and several roles were made permanent. Existing contractors were offered to go perm and a few declined and left. Some accepted and years later are still there as perms.

The two year period was chosen fairly arbitrarily by the CIO but what was more useful was the longer term process of reviewing the contractors on a case by case basis and then being quite ruthless in binning those who were deemed to have served their purpose rather than getting sucked into BAU 'stuff'.

Conversely I know one client that has this rule but doesn't necessarily enforce it well. In the infrastructure team, they had contractors doing the same role for five years or more and justified it by making some vague claims about carrying out 'market testing' and reporting that they couldn't attract the right skills for perms.

[northernladuk]

I worked at Revenue Scotland where a 23 month rule applied, I was told the reason was that if a contractor was needed for longer then the role should be permie.

Was told the same. Guess what they did, got another contractor in after.

[gables]

I worked at Revenue Scotland where a 23 month rule applied, I was told the reason was that if a contractor was needed for longer then the role should be permie.

[Paralytic]

Not the most helpful comment

Still it's their loss so onwards and uplwards

You might have well asked us to guess what your shoe size is. No-one here will be able to tell you something only your client can tell you.

In case you missed it, there is no such thing as "the 2 year rule".

[Grinzola]

Not the most helpful comment

Still it's their loss so onwards and uplwards

[malvolio]

Jag får höra att jag inte kan påbörja ett nytt uppdrag eftersom av 2-årsregeln Hur länge måste jag vänta innan jag jobbar med dem igen tidigare har jag avslutat uppdraget på fredagen och påbörjat ett annat på måndagen

Hjalpsamt, inte

[northernladuk]

You've also breached the CUK 1 post rule. You are allowed 1 post that should have been in prof forums in General where we will be kind. Next one is open season

[Lance]

Recently finished a 2 year contract with Ericsson
despite having worked more than 2 years for them previously i am being told i cannot start another assignment because
of the 2 Year Rule
How long do i need to wait before working with them again
in the past i have finished assignment on Friday and started another on the Monday

It is an Ericsson rule that you cannot do longer than 2 years, so only they know.

[PerfectStorm]

All contracts end, and are meant to end - assuming you're a real company with things to offer to more than one client in the world, take the cue and get the next name on the CV based on the strength of the previous one

[northernladuk]

Who knows? It depends on their reasoning behind the rule, which is highly likely to be flawed anyway so there is no way of knowing what the return policy is. It is really annoying when it hits though. Drop all your work, give it to someone else to carry on for what appears to be no reason, but it is what it is.

I've been subject to the two year rule three times now, twice with the same client and it's non negotiable. From memory all three were to stop problems with claiming employment rights which obviously is totally incorrect but they are playing safe and so be it. It was two years before went back to the client I worked with twice, just different role further down the line so zero issues. New dept, new manager so completely new gig. When I left first time I was told they don't know and unlikely to have me back because of risk anyway so I just moved on.

It's frustrating but you can't hang on to gigs like this. You are done, your IR35 status is probably in jeaporady if you are 'outside' anyway so just be happy you've had a great run and move on. Nothing you can find out, say or do is going to change their minds.

[Paddy]

Why not ask Ericsson...?

Jag får höra att jag inte kan påbörja ett nytt uppdrag eftersom av 2-årsregeln Hur länge måste jag vänta innan jag jobbar med dem igen tidigare har jag avslutat uppdraget på fredagen och påbörjat ett annat på måndagen