• 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!

Anti Competitive behaviour

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Anti Competitive behaviour

    In Scotlands Oil & Gas Industry there was a concern amongst the big employers that Engineers were switching jobs on a regular basis to move to better pay. This caused employers considerable problems in recruiting and retaining key Engineers. Wages spiralled and companies training programs were essentially benefitting well the engineers themselves.

    of course the catalyst in all this was us lot.. the evil recruitment agencies who were encouraging engineers to move jobs and helping them to negotiate fat wage increase, whilst at the same time filling their own pockets with big fat fees.

    So the employers got together and decided that the best thing to do was to make such activity for agents unprofitable. They all agreed with a gentleman's handshake to pay agencies the same rates for contract (mark up of 8%) and for permanent 10% of basic salaries.

    This had the effect of depowering the cycle of employee mobility by putting the onus back on the Engineers to do their own thing. After all no agent in their right mind was going to spend inordinate amounts of time coercing engineers to change jobs with such low rewards. Instead agencies became entirely reactive (as opposed to proactive) in their recruitment activities, looking for volume with the existing market of engineers available in order to make money.

    Whilst everyone can snigger at the misfortune of the agencies this policy has had the effect of helping companies to retain staff and keep wages down, whilst putting agencies in their place.

    The other effect is that the engineers themselves are losing out, because their skills are no longer subjected to market forces and a lack of information along with numerous no poaching agreements has protected these companies from competition.

    I am trying to break into this market and have decided to refer this arrangement to the OFT. Are any of you Jockos aware of these arrangements? and do they also apply to IT contractors in the region.

    I have also attached a poll on the subject
    20
    This is Definatly a cartel that should be referred to the OFT
    25.00%
    5
    What is Oil & Gas? who cares about Scotland anyway?
    10.00%
    2
    HA Ha DA you are stuffed. Live with it
    40.00%
    8
    Andy W is behind this cartel
    25.00%
    5
    Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

    #2
    Agree with Dodgy on this one. When companies, squash out the agencies, and remove competition just as detrimental to the contractors, cos it leaves them on sh*tty low rates, as determined by the big co's, that have cosied up to one another.
    I'm alright Jack

    Comment


      #3
      And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

      Comment


        #4
        Dodgy, there's also a blacklist...
        Insanity: repeating the same actions, but expecting different results.
        threadeds website, and here's my blog.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by threaded View Post
          Dodgy, there's also a blacklist...
          do you know where I can see it?
          Last edited by DodgyAgent; 10 December 2009, 13:00.
          Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

          Comment


            #6
            It’s a crude attempt at manipulating the market. I think the wheels of free enterprise need some lubrication up there.
            And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

            Comment


              #7
              You have no chance as you are not even in their industry. Now if you were part of oil and gas industry and all other companies in the same sector agreed to some anti-competitive deal that would cost you, then you might have had a case.

              Employees may have a case but I doubt it also.

              IANAL of course.

              Frankly behavior of recruiters in this case was appalling and had detrimental effect on the industry in question - one of a few that actually still have real export potential. You should not be spending time to get someone change the job in order for you to make money, you should be finding jobs for people who either want to leave themselves or happened to be out of job/contract at the moment.
              Last edited by AtW; 10 December 2009, 13:01.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                It’s a crude attempt at manipulating the market. I think the wheels of free enterprise need some lubrication up there.
                if only they had access to some oil - but they don't. It's all ours!
                Rule Number 1 - Assuming that you have a valid contract in place always try to get your poo onto your timesheet, provided that the timesheet is valid for your current contract and covers the period of time that you are billing for.

                I preferred version 1!

                Comment


                  #9
                  or conversely you could try and see it from the companies point of view that they were forever having to recruit and train people without ever getting any return.

                  In addition to this they would have been effectively paying the agency say 25% - only for that engineer to go after 6 months and the company down the road had to pay the agency another say 25%.

                  I know very little about the industry but why would does DA think it is ok to use it as a cash cow?

                  I mean where is the loyalty to the company - such as


                  Hmm I placed that guy 6 months ago I could

                  a) See if I can get another contractor in and make some money

                  or

                  b) Take that contractor I placed 6 months ago away from a client I am trying to build a relationship with and sell him to the company down the road and then sell the original client another contractor and thus effectively double my money for little work as I do not need to go through the whole recruitment/search and selection process for one of the placements.



                  Lets see if any can think why the industry has banded together to save themselves from this quite obvious profiteering and also cut down on spiralling training costs and get some long term quality engineers who really know the systems and possible could in an emergeny by the difference between life and death.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by AtW View Post
                    You should not be spending time to get someone change the job in order for you to make money,
                    Why not?

                    Should this be a privilege reserved for those directors who take huge pay packets when headhunted by another company, along with a risk-free severance package? Should it perhaps be reserved for footballers who are offered a gazillion squid to move to Barcelona?
                    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X