 |
|
| CURRENT SECTION :: News | UK's most visited IT Contractor Site - 250k unique visitors March 2008 |
|
 |
A systems administrator is to take his client to court after they replaced him with a cheaper contractor willing to work for £10 an hour less, on the same IT project. Tim Tremaine, was hired by Lockheed Martin to provide network support for government IT sites and had served under the company for five years. He alleges that he was unfairly dismissed after a cheaper contractor was recruited, forcing him out of his role with no redundancy or alternative work arrangements on offer. Lockheed Martin has explained Mr Tremaine was never one of its employees but was instead employed by his own company ‘Yourlife,’ which was under contract with recruiters, Advanced Resource Managers. A spokeswoman at the US-based company said, “Since he was not an employee of Lockheed Martin, it would be inappropriate for us to comment pending litigation.” Contractor UK has learnt of similar disputes where permanent and temporary workers have undercut the hired help, causing clients to displace IT professionals already ‘on the job.’ In the present case, the contractor was never offered the chance to renegotiate his rates or find other work within the company. Roger Sinclair, legal consultant with Egos Ltd, told CUK, if the case were to have any chance of success, “the individual would have to show that there was a contract of employment between himself and the client; that need not be written and could be an implied contract of employment.” “Recent cases have shown a tendency to swing towards the individual here, and have made clear that that the Employment Tribunal must give proper consideration to whether or not there is such an implied contract.” “This will depend on the wording of the written contracts, and on the reality of what actually happened day to day, between the individual and client.” Egos advises that a contractor who seeks legal redress as a result of being displaced, whether by another contractor, or by a ‘permie,’ would generally have to make his complaint under the unfair dismissal legislation, as being pursued by Mr Tremaine. “In the case of an employee who was displaced in such a fashion, the employer would certainly be in some difficulties, and would have an uphill struggle to show that he had acted fairly,” “At the least, he would have to show an open discussion with the employee about the situation, and consideration of any alternatives, before the employer took a decision.” Mr Tremaine has revealed since making his complaint to the Employment Tribunal he received letters from his agency persuading him to drop the case. Egos said : “It is hardly surprising that the agency have sought to persuade the individual to drop the case – apart from any other considerations, it may well be if the individual were to succeed in his case against the client, the client would then be able to seek indemnity under its own contract with the agency. So, it might just be that the agency will end up picking up the tab.” Reflecting on the case, Mr Tremaine revealed he was “shocked” at the company’s decision because he was regularly assured his work was of a good standard. He stated: “I had been told every year, ‘your contract will be renewed, we are very happy with your services.’ I was more shocked when they I found out they had found someone cheaper.” If successful, the case could set a legal precedent, highlighting the potential risk IT employers face from self-employed contractors claiming the same rights as permanent employees. Aug 19, 2004 Email this article Printer friendly page Previous Page
|
|
  |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| All content © Contractor UK Limited | http://www.contractoruk.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1[Register for News Letter] | [Privacy Statement] | [Terms of Use] | [Top of Page] |