Reply to: Agency Says They Have Exclusive and Sole Right To Payroll Contractors

[hitman126]

Well there's a shame. It's not me that's wrong. And I'm rude to everybody and always have been. Just how rude depends, among other things, on the level of frustration with the OP...

"It's not me that's wrong"
Like seriously???

It's obvious you clearly don't understand the essence of being on a knowledge-sharing forum.
No one is right or wrong. It's all about sharing ideas and if you get frustrated addressing queries
from others because you think you're supremely knowledgeable and can't deal with queries from
people of "inferior knowledge" as you, then you're in the wrong place joining a forum buddy.

It's "refreshing" to see you acknowledge your rudeness and obviously feel proud beating your
chest and shouting about it off the rooftops. Good on you.

Trust me, I get rewarded extremely well in my profession but I'm still humble enough to ask
questions like I did here, without expecting to run into such pomposity. I won't though lose any
sleep over your bad attitude or churlishness......not a minute's sleep!! Doesn't bother me at all.

[northernladuk]

@Malvolio, I'm not even going to dignify your foul-mouthed rant with the proper response it deserves!!

If you have little of value to contribute or cannot act with some decorum, don't bother responding to a
thread, Mr. Know-It All. I wonder why you're even on a forum with such attitude.

To be fair its one of the best bits of advice on the thread.

[malvolio]

@Malvolio, I'm not even going to dignify your foul-mouthed rant with the proper response it deserves!!

If you have little of value to contribute or cannot act with some decorum, don't bother responding to a
thread, Mr. Know-It All. I wonder why you're even on a forum with such attitude.

Well there's a shame. It's not me that's wrong. And I'm rude to everybody and always have been. Just how rude depends, among other things, on the level of frustration with the OP...

[hitman126]

Yeah. At this point you begin to sound like an idiot.

The thing is, when you've been offered the job, the ball is is in your court. You have the power. You have all the time in the world. The client want you. The agency are absolutely desparate that you sign so they can get their money.

You seem to, even after all these years, no grapsed that the client and agency are entirely distinct.

Thank you for the wise words. Much appreciated.

[NotAllThere]

Well, that's a valid point. However, as is often the case in the IT contract market, it is quite common for one
to receive a call about a role, be interviewed and offered the job all within hours, leaving you very little time
to ask lots of pertinent questions, especially when this has been a well-trodden path you've been used to for
years.

Yeah. At this point you begin to sound like an idiot.

The thing is, when you've been offered the job, the ball is is in your court. You have the power. You have all the time in the world. The client want you. The agency are absolutely desparate that you sign so they can get their money.

You seem to, even after all these years, no grapsed that the client and agency are entirely distinct.

[ladymuck]

You're right, perhaps "legal" wasn't quite the right word..

That's a completely different scenario.

The article is where an agency specifies which umbrellas it will accept. Often they cite compliance as to the reason. It is not liked but it is not illegal.

Your scenario is where the client (I suspect) has decided no PSCs and no umbrellas and have asked the agency to run payroll. It's not entirely clear but that's the impression I'm getting. Again, it's not liked but also not illegal.

It's not up to the agency to tell you anything you don't ask about. So, although Mal could have worded his response better, the gist of what he said is true. It's your responsibility to make yourself aware of these things and saying it didn't come up simply indicates that you didn't ask the question.

[hitman126]

Just to help me find all these threads in the future. Just because people don't like something it doesn't mean it's illegal. Companies thee size of Hays don't generally engage in illegal practices. Sometimes it's a bit hooky or even unfair but illegal?

You're right, perhaps "legal" wasn't quite the right word.

[hitman126]

The finer details are what makes the difference between being comfortable and being unexpectedly landed with a major problem. As is reading the f***ing contract, even if you don't get it reviewed, and understanding exactly what you are being offered.

No idea what you do to earn money, but your job is "being a contractor". And that means doing the homework. It's not like there haven't been loads of threads on here and elsewhere about the new variations on hiring were being offered these days. And the problems people are getting into...

@Malvolio, I'm not even going to dignify your foul-mouthed rant with the proper response it deserves!!

If you have little of value to contribute or cannot act with some decorum, don't bother responding to a
thread, Mr. Know-It All. I wonder why you're even on a forum with such attitude.

[malvolio]

The finer details are what makes the difference between being comfortable and being unexpectedly landed with a major problem. As is reading the f***ing contract, even if you don't get it reviewed, and understanding exactly what you are being offered.

No idea what you do to earn money, but your job is "being a contractor". And that means doing the homework. It's not like there haven't been loads of threads on here and elsewhere about the new variations on hiring were being offered these days. And the problems people are getting into...

[LondonManc]

So, in answer to your question, the finer details of the method of engagement were never discussed with the agency at the time, other than the fact it would be within scope of IR35, which wasn't in itself a complete showstopper for me. What I did however believe was that I'd be entitled to nominate an Umbrella company of my own choice, not have one imposed on me by the agency. I vaguely recall reading on another platform a while back that agencies weren't allowed to impose an umbrella company on you and hence my question.

It's not illegal. It's no different to clients dealing with a preferred set of agencies. If none of the umbrella companies are trustworthy and you wouldn't take the contract because you're being forced down a specific route, raise it. Odds are the role will miraculously be pulled at the last minute though.

[hitman126]

Interesting that the engagement method didn't come up until the contract was offered. That's surely a subset of the first question you ask, not what you wait to be told?

Well, that's a valid point. However, as is often the case in the IT contract market, it is quite common for one
to receive a call about a role, be interviewed and offered the job all within hours, leaving you very little time
to ask lots of pertinent questions, especially when this has been a well-trodden path you've been used to for
years.

There are many IT contractors who even struggle to find the time (or bother) to read all 20-30 odd pages of
their contract and only find out about things like the terms of their notice period, when they're well into the
contract. If the role, it's location, rate and duration are suitable and attractive, those are the factors that take
centre stage initially and all other questions come later. It is no excuse and it's certainly not great, but that's
just the reality.

So, in answer to your question, the finer details of the method of engagement were never discussed with the
agency at the time, other than the fact it would be within scope of IR35, which wasn't in itself a complete
showstopper for me. What I did however believe was that I'd be entitled to nominate an Umbrella company
of my own choice, not have one imposed on me by the agency. I vaguely recall reading on another platform
a while back that agencies weren't allowed to impose an umbrella company on you and hence my question.

[ladymuck]

Interesting that the engagement method didn't come up until the contract was offered. That's surely a subset of the first question you ask, not what you wait to be told?

[northernladuk]

Just to help me find all these threads in the future. Just because people don't like something it doesn't mean it's illegal. Companies thee size of Hays don't generally engage in illegal practices. Sometimes it's a bit hooky or even unfair but illegal?

[GhostofTarbera]

Is this legal at all?

Not the right question to ask

The right question is - Can they do this

And the answer is yes they can

It’s up to them how they want to engage a resource


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[LondonManc]

Well, understanding what I'm signing up for is all the more reason why I'm asking the questions here, which is what this forum is all about, no?

Absolutely. There's a fantastic search function too.

NLUK provides lessons in it, it's that good.