PDA

View Full Version : Reforming Employment Agencies?



Android
3rd May 2012, 16:13
Hello all,

Wouldn't it be amazing if the law was changed to make it mandatory for all agencies to declare their Full Commision as well as the Employer's min/max offer for every role advertised so that Contractors can decide if they want to accept a lower rate knowing that it is a true market value rather than being ripped off? Estate Agents declare this upfront before they sell houses so why not employment agencies?

1) Will this make contracting more secure and less exploited, or will it make it even harder to find contracts?
2) Will it clean up the industry, or will they find ways to get round it? (say via Agency registration fees?)
3) Perhaps only an ePetition can bring the spotlight on this shark infested business?

Please feel free to contribute to this open post any way helpful, impartial or other wise with a flame thrower. Perhaps you work as an agency drone and would like to defend your position and/or expose the rogues in the business? But just be careful and diplomatic as we don't really want to upset the website's advertising sponsors... Now do we?

Go on have your say, I am sure the Mods will have the fire extinguisher on stand by if it gets too hot.

Enjoy!!! :)

EternalOptimist
3rd May 2012, 16:20
Hello all,

Wouldn't it be amazing if the law was changed to make it mandatory for all agencies to declare their Full Commision as well as the Employer's min/max offer for every role advertised so that Contractors can decide if they want to accept a lower rate knowing that it is a true market value rather than being ripped off? Estate Agents declare this upfront before they sell houses so why not employment agencies?

1) Will this make contracting more secure and less exploited, or will it make it even harder to find contracts?
2) Will it clean up the industry, or will they find ways to get round it? (say via Agency registration fees?)
3) Perhaps only an ePetition can bring the spotlight on this shark infested business?

Please feel free to contribute to this open post any way helpful, impartial or other wise with a flame thrower. Perhaps you work as an agency drone and would like to defend your position and/or expose the rogues in the business? But just be careful and diplomatic as we don't really want to upset the website's advertising sponsors... Now do we?

Go on have your say, I am sure the Mods will have the fire extinguisher on stand by if it gets too hot.

Enjoy!!! :)


why do you say enjoy at the end of your post ?

are you some sort of mentally deficient waiter-trained fast food, hard of thinking dumb-assed fckwit of a numbskull ?

is it a command ? it looks like one. ball bag.




:rolleyes:

cojak
3rd May 2012, 16:23
I always ask 2 questions.

Why you? Why now?

EternalOptimist
3rd May 2012, 16:23
I always ask 2 questions.

Why you? Why now?

android


is that a clue ?

Sands of Time
3rd May 2012, 16:24
It goes against my free market views.

No, I don't want more regulation.

I abhor more regulation.

I don't want more civil servants ensuring regulations are adhered to.

I don't want more taxation to pay for more regulation and civil servents.

Now, just p1ss right off!


Tone

Bunk
3rd May 2012, 16:33
5 :eyes

d000hg
3rd May 2012, 16:43
Wouldn't it be amazing if the law was changed to make it mandatory for all agencies to declare their Full Commision as well as the Employer's min/max offer for every role advertised so that Contractors can decide if they want to accept a lower rate knowing that it is a true market value rather than being ripped off?No that sounds stupid.

cojak
3rd May 2012, 17:05
android


is that a clue ?

Not really..

Although he's a) got a grudge against this board and b) never bothered reading it if he thinks we're worried about our 'advertising sponsors'.

I've banned one or two of them on occasion.

Android
3rd May 2012, 17:11
why do you say enjoy at the end of your post ?

are you some sort of mentally deficient waiter-trained fast food, hard of thinking dumb-assed fckwit of a numbskull ?
is it a command ? it looks like one. ball bag.

:rolleyes:


Did you actually have a constuctive opinion to share or are you the agency drone I spoke to yesterday?

EternalOptimist
3rd May 2012, 17:19
Did you actually have a constuctive opinion to share or are you the agency drone I spoke to yesterday?

my constructive opinion is that regulation is a waste of time and a solution to a problem that is either temporary or does not exist.
The way the agents operate may be unpalatable but will only become a problem if they form into a cartel, or organise in some other way. I dont see it at the moment, I see agencies going bust and I see guys working direct. I see new agencies and I see new paradigms. like brollies

Your , lets have a load of rules that will increase costs in order to reduce costs, and 'enjoy' attitude leave me cold

the world is full of intefering do gooder busybody know nothings who are full of solutions to problems that only exist in their own minds. I have you tagged as one of them



:rolleyes:

cojak
3rd May 2012, 17:29
...and that's before the PCG negotiates an opt-out. :rolleyes:

Sands of Time
3rd May 2012, 17:33
my constructive opinion is that regulation is a waste of time and a solution to a problem that is either temporary or does not exist.
The way the agents operate may be unpalatable but will only become a problem if they form into a cartel, or organise in some other way. I dont see it at the moment, I see agencies going bust and I see guys working direct. I see new agencies and I see new paradigms. like brollies

Your , lets have a load of rules that will increase costs in order to reduce costs, and 'enjoy' attitude leave me cold

the world is full of intefering do gooder busybody know nothings who are full of solutions to problems that only exist in their own minds. I have you tagged as one of them



:rolleyes:


Nail hit squarely on the head.



Tone

EternalOptimist
3rd May 2012, 17:35
and, by the way,

do not ask people to reply, even if its a flame

then complain when they flame you


it makes you look a bit like a prima donna


:rolleyes:

alreadypacked
3rd May 2012, 17:58
What's to reform

http://www.recruitment-views.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/behiringinfographicweb.gif

Android
3rd May 2012, 18:03
It goes against my free market views.

No, I don't want more regulation.

I abhor more regulation.
I don't want more civil servants ensuring regulations are adhered to.
I don't want more taxation to pay for more regulation and civil servents.
Now, just p1ss right off!

Tone

Do you also defend Loan Sharks just because you abhor red tape? Or should they be allowed to charge 1000's % because it is a free market?

Anyway, Why would cleaning up this industry cause you more red tape? All it is suggested is that they should be forced to be honest by stating in the advert how much commision they will be charging, They have the right to charge what they like, and I have the right to go to another agency and apply for the same job but for a better deal, What's wrong with that?

Again, I have read nothing constructive so far but I guess the first crop of posts hardly matter given the level of non-debate replies.

Android
3rd May 2012, 18:06
No that sounds stupid.


Perhaps you could offer a reasoned debate other than a vague personal opinion? That would be nice.

Sands of Time
3rd May 2012, 18:07
Do you also defend Loan Sharks just because you abhor red tape? Or should they be allowed to charge 1000's % because it is a free market?

Anyway, Why would cleaning up this industry cause you more red tape? All it is suggested is that they should be forced to be honest by stating in the advert how much commision they will be charging, They have the right to charge what they like, and I have the right to go to another agency and apply for the same job but for a better deal, What's wrong with that?

Again, I have read nothing constructive so far but I guess the first crop of posts hardly matter given the level of non-debate replies.


Yes I defend loan sharks.



Tone

minestrone
3rd May 2012, 18:12
I don't lose sleep over this.


The loan shark analogy from android is laughable, Modis do not hang about my place of work tooled up waiting for HR to come out if my invoice is a day late in being paid.

cojak
3rd May 2012, 18:16
Do you also defend Loan Sharks just because you abhor red tape? Or should they be allowed to charge 1000's % because it is a free market?

Anyway, Why would cleaning up this industry cause you more red tape? All it is suggested is that they should be forced to be honest by stating in the advert how much commision they will be charging, They have the right to charge what they like, and I have the right to go to another agency and apply for the same job but for a better deal, What's wrong with that?

Again, I have read nothing constructive so far but I guess the first crop of posts hardly matter given the level of non-debate replies.

1000's%??

I've told you a million times....

Why on earth should we respond sensibly? You don't

Btw if it was a 1000%, I might consider joining up meself.

EternalOptimist
3rd May 2012, 18:22
I don't lose sleep over this.


The loan shark analogy from android is laughable, Modis do not hang about my place of work tooled up waiting for HR to come out if my invoice is a day late in being paid.

It's all about control. People can not be trusted to make their own decisions in a free market, an army of bureaucrats and lawyers are required to make sure everyone is protected and makes the 'right' decisions. Rather than give poor people a cheaper alternative to loan sharks, lets spend our energy banning badness and greed.
Lets not make the agency industry a free market, lets use the weight of the state to ban badness and greed. Next week we will show you how to nail a jelly to the ceiling


:rolleyes:

minestrone
3rd May 2012, 18:28
It's all about control. People can not be trusted to make their own decisions in a free market, an army of bureaucrats and lawyers are required to make sure everyone is protected and makes the 'right' decisions. Rather than give poor people a cheaper alternative to loan sharks, lets spend our energy banning badness and greed.
Lets not make the agency industry a free market, lets use the weight of the state to ban badness and greed. Next week we will show you how to nail a jelly to the ceiling


:rolleyes:

http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/607/rationbook.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/825/rationbook.jpg/)

administrator
3rd May 2012, 19:09
Hello all,

Wouldn't it be amazing if the law was changed to make it mandatory for all agencies to declare their Full Commision as well as the Employer's min/max offer for every role advertised so that Contractors can decide if they want to accept a lower rate knowing that it is a true market value rather than being ripped off? Estate Agents declare this upfront before they sell houses so why not employment agencies?

1) Will this make contracting more secure and less exploited, or will it make it even harder to find contracts?
2) Will it clean up the industry, or will they find ways to get round it? (say via Agency registration fees?)
3) Perhaps only an ePetition can bring the spotlight on this shark infested business?

Please feel free to contribute to this open post any way helpful, impartial or other wise with a flame thrower. Perhaps you work as an agency drone and would like to defend your position and/or expose the rogues in the business? But just be careful and diplomatic as we don't really want to upset the website's advertising sponsors... Now do we?

Go on have your say, I am sure the Mods will have the fire extinguisher on stand by if it gets too hot.

Enjoy!!! :)

I have never heard an EA disclose their fees to me before being shown around a house or buying one, that is a private deal between EA and punter, same as when you take on a contract.

Did you watch The Apprentice last night? Should shops be declaring what their margin is on the gear they sell on in case anyone gets ripped off? Are all shop owners therefore sharks because they make an undisclosed profit?

Are you new to contracting?

minestrone
3rd May 2012, 19:17
If half the board could not stop the bouncing football advert...

administrator
3rd May 2012, 19:34
If half the board could not stop the bouncing football advert...

Fruck me that was two years ago :tantrum:

minestrone
3rd May 2012, 19:45
Fruck me that was two years ago :tantrum:

I was in a gig in Edinburgh...

Half the office could see I was not coding but arguing with spod about grave digging rabbits.

Android
3rd May 2012, 19:49
Not really..

Although he's a) got a grudge against this board and b) never bothered reading it if he thinks we're worried about our 'advertising sponsors'.
I've banned one or two of them on occasion.


Grudge against this board? Quite the opposite actually, I have visited the forum for a long time now but I only recently joined because the help guides, support and resources here are pretty thorough in content and AAA, It has been a major help to me and my other contractor friends So let's kill this wrong assumption.


Worried about advertising sponsors? Absoloutely not, I don't believe for one minute that it makes a blind bit of difference what is said here by whom nor should it does. I have no idea about the number of agencies out there at the last count, but it is a fact that contractors talk about their experiences, both to warn or recommend So there is no issue or implication here about any influence as this is clearly makes no sense, it was just a humor tease


Grudge agains agencies? Well that is nonsense, every Contractor has a good and bad relationship with all sorts of agencies, On my first contract back in 1997 I went for a job interview for a £22 role, but not did I only get the job but the agency "Computer People" increased that to £24.50 (Yes UP) without me asking for it because they represented me. WOW. Can any of you honestly expect this to happen today? NO. Sadly the business has changed and the filtering is now seldom face to face, we now have reduction to agreed rates, less interviews if you are not cheap enough, demanding more skill than actually needed, and I am hardly the only one here who hasn't been lied to or shafted by some drone or another if the forum here is to be believed? Leveling the field will only hurt those peddling contracts for as low as £9 P/H because they know that first timers are desperate to break into the industry and are ripe for exploitation.

Don't take my word for it, just check out the different rates advertised by different agencies for the exact advertised contract.

doodab
3rd May 2012, 19:53
Next week we will show you how to nail a jelly to the ceiling

Cool. I've always wondered how to do that.

EternalOptimist
3rd May 2012, 20:05
[B]Grudge agains agencies? Well that is nonsense, every Contractor has a good and bad relationship with all sorts of agencies, On my first contract back in 1997 I went for a job interview for a £22 role, but not did I only get the job but the agency "Computer People" increased that to £24.50 (Yes UP) without me asking for it because they represented me. WOW. Can any of you honestly expect this to happen today? NO. Sadly the business has changed and the filtering is now seldom face to face, we now have reduction to agreed rates, less interviews if you are not cheap enough, demanding more skill than actually needed, and I am hardly the only one here who hasn't been lied to or shafted by some drone or another if the forum here is to be believed? Leveling the field will only hurt those peddling contracts for as low as £9 P/H because they know that first timers are desperate to break into the industry and are ripe for exploitation.



dammit.

it is very rare that I have to admit that I have been so badly wrong.
and luckily, this is not one of those occasions

A law to prevent the agents lying to the contractor would also have to prevent the agency lying to the client
and the client lying to the agency
and the contractor lying to the client
and the client lying to the contractor
and the contractor lying to the agency

maybe we just need a law to stop people being people


:rolleyes:

Sands of Time
3rd May 2012, 20:12
dammit.

it is very rare that I have to admit that I have been so badly wrong.
and luckily, this is not one of those occasions

A law to prevent the agents lying to the contractor would also have to prevent the agency lying to the client
and the client lying to the agency
and the contractor lying to the client
and the client lying to the contractor
and the contractor lying to the agency

maybe we just need a law to stop people being people


:rolleyes:



Perhaps we should extend this to all business / government / education / charities / military / religion / etc etc...

I think this a new episode in human evolution...

and it all started here...


Hurrah!



Tone :tired

Android
3rd May 2012, 21:01
my constructive opinion is that regulation is a waste of time and a solution to a problem that is either temporary or does not exist.
The way the agents operate may be unpalatable but will only become a problem if they form into a cartel, or organise in some other way. I dont see it at the moment, I see agencies going bust and I see guys working direct. I see new agencies and I see new paradigms. like brollies

Your , lets have a load of rules that will increase costs in order to reduce costs, and 'enjoy' attitude leave me cold

the world is full of intefering do gooder busybody know nothings who are full of solutions to problems that only exist in their own minds. I have you tagged as one of them

:rolleyes:


Yes I agree paperwork "Regulation" is a criminal waste, but lets put this in context; A job advert disclosure of the actual min/max rate that the client has allowed for the contract is hardly regulation? An extra line of typing takes no more than your email signiture, so why be negative?

Last week I had an agent who impled that the Client would not go above a certain rate, when in fact it was advertised elswhere for £200 p/w more. That would have been a loss of £2400 in 12 weeks, or £9600 in 48 weeks. Sorry but this money is not peanuts in my book.

Busy Body doesn't even come into it, but thanks for the post.

Cliphead
3rd May 2012, 21:09
Yes I agree paperwork "Regulation" is a criminal waste, but lets put this in context; A job advert disclosure of the actual min/max rate that the client has allowed for the contract is hardly regulation? An extra line of typing takes no more than your email signiture, so why be negative?

Last week I had an agent who impled that the Client would not go above a certain rate, when in fact it was advertised elswhere for £200 p/w more. That would have been a loss of £2400 in 12 weeks, or £9600 in 48 weeks. Sorry but this money is not peanuts in my book.

Busy Body doesn't even come into it, but thanks for the post.

:winker:

10

d000hg
3rd May 2012, 21:10
Perhaps you could offer a reasoned debate other than a vague personal opinion? That would be nice.I''m afraid I'll have to disappoint you on that score.

Android
3rd May 2012, 21:23
and, by the way,
do not ask people to reply, even if its a flame
then complain when they flame you
it makes you look a bit like a prima donna

:rolleyes:

Actually, being flamed is not a problem as it is just harmless banter expected in any forum, but doing that without actually contributing an intelligent counter argument generally lowers the level of participation, Wouldn't you agree?

It's really is not a contest, I simply proposed an idea and was looking forward to a wide range of pros & cons with perhaps some actual thought, logic and an explanation of why the system is not so great at the moment? Since the majority are honest but are having to compete with the dodgy few that are exploiting the system, I hoped a bright spark could have shared an insight into the mechanics of this business?

Cliphead
3rd May 2012, 21:24
Actually, being flamed is not a problem as it is just harmless banter expected in any forum, but doing that without actually contributing an intelligent counter argument generally lowers the level of participation, Wouldn't you agree?

It's really is not a contest, I simply proposed an idea and was looking forward to a wide range of pros & cons with perhaps some actual thought, logic and an explanation of why the system is not so great at the moment? Since the majority are honest but are having to compete with the dodgy few that are exploiting the system, I hoped a bright spark could have shared an insight into the mechanics of this business?

Still a :winker:

Android
3rd May 2012, 21:28
What's to reform

http://www.recruitment-views.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/behiringinfographicweb.gif

Thanks for your helpful link, it looks like a very interesting read, much appreciated.

d000hg
3rd May 2012, 22:15
Actually, being flamed is not a problem as it is just harmless banter expected in any forum, but doing that without actually contributing an intelligent counter argument generally lowers the level of participation, Wouldn't you agree?No. Are you unfamiliar with the internet?

DodgyAgent
3rd May 2012, 22:19
Actually, being flamed is not a problem as it is just harmless banter expected in any forum, but doing that without actually contributing an intelligent counter argument generally lowers the level of participation, Wouldn't you agree?

It's really is not a contest, I simply proposed an idea and was looking forward to a wide range of pros & cons with perhaps some actual thought, logic and an explanation of why the system is not so great at the moment? Since the majority are honest but are having to compete with the dodgy few that are exploiting the system, I hoped a bright spark could have shared an insight into the mechanics of this business?

What is so interesting is that your idea has been "flamed" not by people with a vested interest (like me) but by people who have the most to gain from your so called transparency. Why? because the logic behind your argument is such that it could not be confined simply to recruitment, but also the implications of giving power to someone to make decisions on what is fair is quite abhorrent.

You really should try and think things through

Android
3rd May 2012, 22:23
I have never heard an EA disclose their fees to me before being shown around a house or buying one, that is a private deal between EA and punter, same as when you take on a contract.

Did you watch The Apprentice last night? Should shops be declaring what their margin is on the gear they sell on in case anyone gets ripped off? Are all shop owners therefore sharks because they make an undisclosed profit?

Are you new to contracting?


First: Disclosing the Client's true min/max does not mean they are disclosing the final agreed rate plus their % (i.e Profit), so your Shopkeeper argument does not apply and the agents will still protect their financial charges. But I do accept your premise that there must be some confidentiality.

Second: This is a true and accurate account of my current house sale;

I emailed my local EAs and asked for a "Sample Contract" and a "Fee Structure" so I could use these to short list three agents for the sole agency and a valuation visit. Only one refused so I emailed back thanking him for his interest with my best wishes. He immediatly emailed me back the full details with a note saying that the commission could be negotiated on the day if the house is chain free (which he knew it was).

So yes, even EAs will disclose their fees before a visit if they want to win more business. I saved £3000.

I hope this helps anyone here selling their house

fullyautomatix
3rd May 2012, 22:43
why do you say enjoy at the end of your post ?

are you some sort of mentally deficient waiter-trained fast food, hard of thinking dumb-assed fckwit of a numbskull ?

is it a command ? it looks like one. ball bag.




:rolleyes:

:rollin:

Where are these newbie feckwits flocking from?

Android
3rd May 2012, 22:53
What is so interesting is that your idea has been "flamed" not by people with a vested interest (like me) but by people who have the most to gain from your so called transparency. Why? because the logic behind your argument is such that it could not be confined simply to recruitment, but also the implications of giving power to someone to make decisions on what is fair is quite abhorrent.

You really should try and think things through

You either agree that there is problem and the new generation of Contractors should be protected from being exploited, or you believe that it should be left to the survival of the fitest?

Incidently, Does anyone know how does this business works abroad?

Scoobos
3rd May 2012, 23:03
I can answer how it worked for me in Canada , which was my introduction to contracting.

Its a flat transparant rate , but quite high.

20% is acceptable, or higher with a "cashback" if you get a 100% reference from the client and stay a full term.

It could actually be worse, in Auckland New Zealand (when I was there in 2009) you had to PAY UP FRONT to "register" your CV with an agent.. There's jack all work there at the mo though

cojak
4th May 2012, 05:43
Oh. Right then.

I won't be signing up for your petition. I don't believe in red tape, it's up to me to get the best rate that I can, not the BIS (who are as useful as a chocolate fire guard, btw).

Thanks all the same.

DodgyAgent
4th May 2012, 06:59
You either agree that there is problem and the new generation of Contractors should be protected from being exploited, or you believe that it should be left to the survival of the fitest?

Incidently, Does anyone know how does this business works abroad?

My own view is that contractors are big enough and ugly enough to take their own responsibility for how they are treated by agencies and that such a well paid group of highly educated intelligent people are perfectly capable of looking after themselves - people like you bleating that they are victims doesnt stack up. The last thing anyone needs is a group of busybodies chucking red tape over everything just in order to have power and influence of their own. There is no dominance of any one agency and anything they do that is severely wrong is covered by the laws of the land anyway.

If you want transparency of charges/margins then legislation would have to apply it to the sale of goods and services across business everywhere. Apart from the cost of implementing and poilicing this interference all this would do would be to stimulate the small minded attitude that has become so prevalent of "what's in it for him".

You also have to ask yourself what is the worst thing that can happen? I would say its not having your bills paid and the agency going bust. You can check out the agency and withold timesheets if they fail to pay you - what else is there.

Anyway there is a group called the EAS and its people people clearly don't have much to do. Their report looks like they've really struggled to put something together to justify their existence and tax payers money.

A 20 billion plus industry with less than 1000 complaints is pretty impressive.


p://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/employment-matters/docs/e/12-498-employment-agency-standards-report-2010-11.pdf

EternalOptimist
4th May 2012, 07:28
What is so interesting is that your idea has been "flamed" not by people with a vested interest (like me) but by people who have the most to gain from your so called transparency. Why? because the logic behind your argument is such that it could not be confined simply to recruitment, but also the implications of giving power to someone to make decisions on what is fair is quite abhorrent.

You really should try and think things through

I would be very exited to learn how you would force a seller to reveal his margin, if he didnt want to.

I was on one gig where a coworker doing the same job as me discovered he was on £50 a day less. He went ballistic , because the client had insisted that the agencies declared their margin and we were both quoted 17%.
So after world war iii had broken out the agency explained that their profit margin was 17% but they had to layer in a training margin, an introductory chaperoning margin and some other bolks.
He started whining about training and the agent said 'you should have asked' and the introductory stuff - 'well we sent you a map of how to get to the site'

This guy was ripped off BECAUSE of the declared margin. Whats the point of negotiating if their is no wriggle room ?

:rolleyes:

TimberWolf
4th May 2012, 08:25
How about mentioning at the interview that the job sounds really interesting and you are keen to start, but that £9/hour seems a bit low.

EternalOptimist
4th May 2012, 08:45
Incept date?

dunno

I only do the eyes

Bunk
4th May 2012, 08:52
I was in a gig in Edinburgh...

Half the office could see I was not coding but arguing with spod about grave digging rabbits.

:rollin:

rd409
4th May 2012, 09:15
Grudge agains agencies? Well that is nonsense, every Contractor has a good and bad relationship with all sorts of agencies, On my first contract back in 1997 I went for a job interview for a £22 role, but not did I only get the job but the agency "Computer People" increased that to £24.50 (Yes UP) without me asking for it because they represented me. WOW. Can any of you honestly expect this to happen today? NO. Sadly the business has changed and the filtering is now seldom face to face, we now have reduction to agreed rates, less interviews if you are not cheap enough, demanding more skill than actually needed, and I am hardly the only one here who hasn't been lied to or shafted by some drone or another if the forum here is to be believed? Leveling the field will only hurt those peddling contracts for as low as £9 P/H because they know that first timers are desperate to break into the industry and are ripe for exploitation.

Don't take my word for it, just check out the different rates advertised by different agencies for the exact advertised contract.

Is it just me to find "Android" complaining about "Drones" funny?

Ahh it is the "Star wars Day":igmc:

Android
4th May 2012, 09:20
I can answer how it worked for me in Canada , which was my introduction to contracting.

Its a flat transparant rate , but quite high.
20% is acceptable, or higher with a "cashback" if you get a 100% reference from the client and stay a full term.

It could actually be worse, in Auckland New Zealand (when I was there in 2009) you had to PAY UP FRONT to "register" your CV with an agent.. There's jack all work there at the mo though


Thanks for your excellent and informative feedback, Clearly it is possible to be transparent yet do the business profitably even though it probably generates more paperwork to manage the references & refunds.

I can live with 20% if the Canadian system makes it beneficial for both agents and contractors to do well by each other. What is your opinion of UK vs Canadian Agencies in the way it has affected your work, negotiation and potential earnings?

One thing for sure, I woudn't say no to CashBack.

Android
4th May 2012, 09:25
Oh. Right then.

I won't be signing up for your petition. I don't believe in red tape, it's up to me to get the best rate that I can, not the BIS (who are as useful as a chocolate fire guard, btw).

Thanks all the same.

ePetition is a mugs game invented by politicians to give the masses the illusion of power. I rather waste my time on a pint of Guinness.

minestrone
4th May 2012, 09:29
Someone shoot this shite sockie.

d000hg
4th May 2012, 09:29
ePetitions can be ignored or brushed under the carpet if the MPs so decide, but that's not the point. They exist as a way MPs can at least know what the public think is important... MPs' job is not to cave in to whatever is popular but make the decisions they consider best.

Android
4th May 2012, 10:20
I would be very exited to learn how you would force a seller to reveal his margin, if he didnt want to.

I was on one gig where a coworker doing the same job as me discovered he was on £50 a day less. He went ballistic , because the client had insisted that the agencies declared their margin and we were both quoted 17%.
So after world war iii had broken out the agency explained that their profit margin was 17% but they had to layer in a training margin, an introductory chaperoning margin and some other bolks.
He started whining about training and the agent said 'you should have asked' and the introductory stuff - 'well we sent you a map of how to get to the site'

This guy was ripped off BECAUSE of the declared margin. Whats the point of negotiating if their is no wriggle room ?

:rolleyes:

The Client may judge that he requires a little more skill in one direction so any two contractors working together doing the same role may not be equally productive in that area of expertise, so the rate may be slightly different, so what?

I know for a fact that I am getting £75 p/d less than the other contractor I work with for doing the same role, but that doesn't bother me as I think good luck to him for having a better agency and joined work before me when the rates were a bit higher. No big deal.

I don't need to know the commission agreed between the agent and the Client, but I want to know the true min/max scale proposed by the Client for the role. So if it is £300-£400 then the agent shouldn't pretend it is £250-£325 so that he keeps this extra on top of the agreed confidential commission with the Client. Usually they advertise these as "Negotiable" and ask for your rate first.

It really comes down to deciding if the Agency is acting as your employer or your agent? As an employer I think they are entitled to offer what the market pays, but as an agent they should represent your best interest and only get paid the confidential commission agreed with the client.

Android
4th May 2012, 10:31
My own view is that contractors are big enough and ugly enough to take their own responsibility for how they are treated by agencies and that such a well paid group of highly educated intelligent people are perfectly capable of looking after themselves - people like you bleating that they are victims doesnt stack up. The last thing anyone needs is a group of busybodies chucking red tape over everything just in order to have power and influence of their own. There is no dominance of any one agency and anything they do that is severely wrong is covered by the laws of the land anyway.

If you want transparency of charges/margins then legislation would have to apply it to the sale of goods and services across business everywhere. Apart from the cost of implementing and poilicing this interference all this would do would be to stimulate the small minded attitude that has become so prevalent of "what's in it for him".

You also have to ask yourself what is the worst thing that can happen? I would say its not having your bills paid and the agency going bust. You can check out the agency and withold timesheets if they fail to pay you - what else is there.

Anyway there is a group called the EAS and its people people clearly don't have much to do. Their report looks like they've really struggled to put something together to justify their existence and tax payers money.

A 20 billion plus industry with less than 1000 complaints is pretty impressive.


p://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/employment-matters/docs/e/12-498-employment-agency-standards-report-2010-11.pdf

Contractors don't complain, we are used to being in the firing line and treated as disposable assets, It is part of the job.

Sands of Time
4th May 2012, 10:45
The Client may judge that he requires a little more skill in one direction so any two contractors working together doing the same role may not be equally productive in that area of expertise, so the rate may be slightly different, so what?

I know for a fact that I am getting £75 p/d less than the other contractor I work with for doing the same role, but that doesn't bother me as I think good luck to him for having a better agency and joined work before me when the rates were a bit higher. No big deal.

I don't need to know the commission agreed between the agent and the Client, but I want to know the true min/max scale proposed by the Client for the role. So if it is £300-£400 then the agent shouldn't pretend it is £250-£325 so that he keeps this extra on top of the agreed confidential commission with the Client. Usually they advertise these as "Negotiable" and ask for your rate first.

It really comes down to deciding if the Agency is acting as your employer or your agent? As an employer I think they are entitled to offer what the market pays, but as an agent they should represent your best interest and only get paid the confidential commission agreed with the client.


You really are a prize fool!

Who says they are your agent????????

TW@T



Tone

Android
4th May 2012, 10:45
How about mentioning at the interview that the job sounds really interesting and you are keen to start, but that £9/hour seems a bit low.

That was a random advertised job used as an example. Sadly I have two very hard working guys at the moment assigned to me for a refresh project who are getting a fraction less than that, and they are about 5/6 weeks behind on their first pay cheque. They are struggling but trapped until they get fully paid. Not nice.

Their agency is a new upstart bidding on price alone at the cut throat business end.

doomage
4th May 2012, 11:05
Mercenaries do not form armies unless you pay them. No matter what the cause.

Except maybe a direct threat like BN66.

So I'd say you were pissing into the wind here, except that you are digging a big whole for yourself at the same time.

darrenb
5th May 2012, 18:06
Android, I think it's a useful suggestion. Don't let yourself be put off by all the negative posts, because people here are not really as dimwitted as they might first appear.

AtW
5th May 2012, 18:07
people here are not really as dimwitted as they might first appear.

That's true.

EternalOptimist
5th May 2012, 22:21
Android, I think it's a useful suggestion. Don't let yourself be put off by all the negative posts, because people here are not really as dimwitted as they might first appear.

That is possibly one of THE most insulting comments I have ever has the misfortune to read on this site.
I definately as dimwitted as I first appear




:rolleyes:

DodgyAgent
6th May 2012, 08:46
Android, I think it's a useful suggestion. Don't let yourself be put off by all the negative posts, because people here are not really as dimwitted as they might first appear.

No they are dimmer than that :laugh