I have just been presented with changes to my existing contract. The agent claims that if I don't sign off the changes within 4 weeks, they will come into effect anyway. This is direct contrast to my contract which states that only changes agreed and signed by both parties may be made to the contract. Anyone have any thoughts on the legality of this claim?
-
-
There is none.
As you say, you have to agree to the changes.
Not entirely sure where you go to next though. If you reject the changes you may find yourself on the wrong end of 4 weeks notice, but if you do nothing the agency might just implement the changes and leave you to sue.
What is the actual nature of the changes, do they result in a monetary difference or just a change of 'obligations' (that probably isn't the right word!)
tim -
Don't want to give too much away as I don't want to identify any parties. One change is basically removal of notice period from my side, forced to work the whole contract. Other states that first hour OT is nil-paid. What I hate the most is the threat that if I don't respond to the "demands" they will become automatic. I really hate threats.>:
Anyway, no skin of my nose as I am considering retiring anyhow, so let them do their worst!
Comment
-
Agent claims that the client has "researched" the market and considers these clauses "standard practice". Don't want to be around when the "standard practice" reaches its next new low. I came into contracting for the flexibility and now have none.
Contract runs out in a few months so I'll just ride it out to the end milking for all its worth. To add a little extra kick I will string client along for as long as possible about renewal and then dump on him when the time comes.
Sure hate leaving the industry I have worked in for 11 years with such a sour taste in my mouth. :|Comment
-
have you spoken to the client ?
Are they really changes coming from the client or just garbage from the agent ?
If you are nearing the end, I would just refuse to accept them and then sue for the notice period.
Or as you say, dump them - they deserve it.
Oh and name the agent....Comment
-
Re: have you spoken to the client ?
Let me find out who it is first. I know a few other contractors who work for the client and will x-ref with them first (and my client sponsor, which I was told NOT to do by my agent!!!!)
If it is the agent I will name them. And they are BIG.Comment
-
Re: have you spoken to the client ?
SP,
1) As Mark says you have to find out if this move is client lead or a whim of the agency. Personally I would immediately ask the client representative and any suggestion from the agency that you should not, is stupid, the client has something to lose here (below) and the agent is a fool if he is shafting the client.
2) The notice period, whilst very significant in principle is a minor problem in reality. Whether this is a client change or an agency change, you can safely reject it. You only have a few months to go, don't seem inclined to want to jump ship, and the idea that a company will invoke a notice period to get rid of somebody because they won't accept a contract with no notice period is peverse in the extreme, and if they do unilaterally (but unenforcably) impose it, you lose nothing.
3) The OT thing is obviously more important. For me the solution is simple: if the rule really is that the first hour is to be unpaid then I simply would not do the first hour (and therefore, not do all subsequent hours), though I appreciate that some people rely on the OT income. This is where the client loses if they actually need the OT worked. I wouldn't be swayed by the line "the project needs you to work the hours", if this really is the case then "the project can pay me for all hours that I work", a free choice for the client to choose between, leave him to make it.
Don't shaft the client here, if a renewall is available, accept it (or not) on the basis of the negotiated terms, using this experience to guide you as to how hard you should negotiate. My guess is that this is the agent TTP and it's in your interest for the client to know this.
timComment
-
Re: have you spoken to the client ?
Thanks, Tim. Plenty of food for thought.
After speaking to a few other contractors who use different agencies, I suspect that it is indeed the client. My sponsor knows nothing about it but that is not unusual as HR dictates with little feedback. He has said that as far as I am concerned, its business as usual but I won't really know that until its possibly too late. Its more the direction of the changes that I find irritating. What's next, Saturdays are mandatory? First hour of standard day is nil-paid? Should have seen this coming when for the first time last year it became policy not to pay for long term contractors to come to the Xmas party (but my sponsor chipped in.)
This is the problem. My sponsor has been good to me, but he is losing control of the contract from his end.
I won't name the agency as it appears that it is not their doing. They have been fair to me in the past and appear to be innocent in this case. As far as the client goes, let's just say if I were signing a new contract with a large American investment bank, I would look at the wording VERY carefully.Comment
-
Re: have you spoken to the client ?
If you don't sign, then the first change can have no effect and your original notice period will stand.One change is basically removal of notice period from my side, forced to work the whole contract. Other states that first hour OT is nil-paid.
For the second point, you could either refuse to do overtime, or book an extra hour each time.Comment
-
Re: have you spoken to the client ?
Problem being if I don't sign, they will "assume" I have agreed to it. Probably end in court which is expensive and I don't like.
As far as OT goes, everyone else is saying the same thing. No pay, no OT. If they let us go, so be it as the working conditions have become poor.
I expect the agent to TTP but when the client starts doing it, I get annoyed.Comment
Comment