Just wondering if any of you experienced folk have had any situations like this. I am a contractor turned permie. Recently hired a contractor direct who was earlier through an agency. We just had a PO with the agency with no Ts and Cs. I had nothing stopping me from approaching the contractor and he accepted the offer. (Lets not go into why I had to get rid of the agency). The agency sent me an email warning that the contractor had a restrictive covenant preventing his joining us. I am now wondering, if by extension, we are also liable even though we had no terms or constraints agreed. Any experience? Advice?
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Legal Question
Collapse
X
-
-
Sounds like the contractor had a clause in his contract with them that prevents him working for you directly.
Surprised that there were no terms of engagement at all between you and the agency. Are you sure? -
Legal Question
I agree with ladymuck. It seems highly unlikely an agency would place someone on the basis of just a P.O.
If true though, legally it isn’t your problem.
It could get messy though and you might lose the guy. Why not negotiate a deal with the agency that suits? At the end of the day you’re the client and hold all the cards bar the contractor being their man.See You Next TuesdayComment
-
No - if there's no restrictive clause in your contract with the agency, they can't come after you. Whether the restriction can be enforced on the contractor depends on the length of the restriction, and how long it was between the contractor leaving and coming back.Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!Comment
-
Originally posted by AnthonyQuinn View PostJust wondering if any of you experienced folk have had any situations like this. I am a contractor turned permie. Recently hired a contractor direct who was earlier through an agency. We just had a PO with the agency with no Ts and Cs. I had nothing stopping me from approaching the contractor and he accepted the offer. (Lets not go into why I had to get rid of the agency). The agency sent me an email warning that the contractor had a restrictive covenant preventing his joining us. I am now wondering, if by extension, we are also liable even though we had no terms or constraints agreed. Any experience? Advice?
Compare notes with the contractor.Comment
-
Why you ditched the agency is pretty key to all this.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostWhy you ditched the agency is pretty key to all this.
It might make a difference for the contractor in regard to his situation with the agency. If the client has ditched the agency because they don't want to work with them anymore, and is willing to stipulate that under no terms would they have engaged someone with that agency anymore, then it would be impossible to prove that the direct deal between the client and the contractor has cost the agency anything. The agency has lost the relationship and was going to have no revenue from it anymore, therefore they have not been harmed by the direct deal.
But OP, the comment that you might lose the contractor is a valid concern. If he gets scared off by legal threats, you lose him. So first you talk to him. And if there's a real concern that you are going to lose a guy you wanted to keep, then maybe you pick up the phone and call the agency and tell them they don't have a leg to stand on but you'd agree a token payment to make them go away and save hassles for everyone. Or alternatively, you could offer that money to the contractor, to compensate him for the risk/hassle of dealing with the agent, if he prefers that.Comment
-
Originally posted by AnthonyQuinn View PostWe just had a PO with the agency with no Ts and Cs.
This MSA may well dictate a number of conditions that will not be replicated on each individual PO as your company has agreed to be bound by them in all dealings with said agency.
Rather than sort this yourself I suggest you direct the agency to your procurement/HR functionComment
-
Originally posted by oilboil View PostI think the devil in the detail here is in this statement. Agencies and companies generally work in the PO only model when there is an overarching Master Services Agreement in place between the two (probably held by procurement or HR).
This MSA may well dictate a number of conditions that will not be replicated on each individual PO as your company has agreed to be bound by them in all dealings with said agency.
Rather than sort this yourself I suggest you direct the agency to your procurement/HR function
Except if the client company had a restrictive clause with the agency, why is the agency referencing the clause with the contractor. So do due diligence etc. But it looks at first sight as if any restriction sits with the contractor. If of course it exists, is valid and the agency can demonstrate loss.Comment
-
Originally posted by northernladyuk View PostTrue enough...
Except if the client company had a restrictive clause with the agency, why is the agency referencing the clause with the contractor. So do due diligence etc. But it looks at first sight as if any restriction sits with the contractor. If of course it exists, is valid and the agency can demonstrate loss.
If that fails to get the "wind up" then they may well later go back with "Following a review of our contracts it appears you Mr. Permie have allowed your employer to breach our agreement"
But the "attack the company" approach will be after they have exhausted trying to get the Contractor to "fall on their sword" as they will be keen not to annoy the purse-keeperComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment