I currently supply programming services to Government department, and contain a clause for Substitution in my contract.
A colleague of mine returned to India over the Christmas period and successfully hired and deployed a Stubstitute to meet the obligations of his company during the period. The worker was hired on a casual per hour basis and was successfully cleared to work on the site.
My colleague duely returned to work in the first week in January.
We have received word this morning that a manager several layers above us has thrown his toys about the Substitute ever having been allowed to take the place of my colleague, who is currently jumping up and down in a meeting room pointing at his contract and his right to supply a substitute.
All other contractors in the team (myself included) have today received an e-mail from said manager, stating that "despite what may be written into your contracts the company expects YOU to supply the services as per your contracts despite the presence of any substitution clause"
and that
"any requests/instructions that a substitute will be provided for any period of time will be flatly rejected by the company".
This leaves myself and my fellow contractor colleagues nervous that the clause for substitution is a sham clause that the end client clearly has no further intention to honour.
I say further, because my colleague's substitution clause was undoubtably honoured over the Xmas 2012 period.
In the opnion of the forum, does this mail shot constitute a change to my contract which I cannot argue against?
Given that March is looming, this is the public sector and that my contract expires at the end of February I anticipate that I and many other contractors shall be fleeing the public sector.
A colleague of mine returned to India over the Christmas period and successfully hired and deployed a Stubstitute to meet the obligations of his company during the period. The worker was hired on a casual per hour basis and was successfully cleared to work on the site.
My colleague duely returned to work in the first week in January.
We have received word this morning that a manager several layers above us has thrown his toys about the Substitute ever having been allowed to take the place of my colleague, who is currently jumping up and down in a meeting room pointing at his contract and his right to supply a substitute.
All other contractors in the team (myself included) have today received an e-mail from said manager, stating that "despite what may be written into your contracts the company expects YOU to supply the services as per your contracts despite the presence of any substitution clause"
and that
"any requests/instructions that a substitute will be provided for any period of time will be flatly rejected by the company".
This leaves myself and my fellow contractor colleagues nervous that the clause for substitution is a sham clause that the end client clearly has no further intention to honour.
I say further, because my colleague's substitution clause was undoubtably honoured over the Xmas 2012 period.
In the opnion of the forum, does this mail shot constitute a change to my contract which I cannot argue against?
Given that March is looming, this is the public sector and that my contract expires at the end of February I anticipate that I and many other contractors shall be fleeing the public sector.
Comment