Handcuff after 4 years?

[Scotchpie]

Hi

I've been working for a client through an agency. The client has repeatedly extended my contract so that I have been with them for 4 years. This year's budget however has been slashed so much that they can no longer keep me on, especially via the agent.

Am I okay to approach them independently. Are handcuffs still valid after a 4 year stretch. I can understand an agency trying to protect their business on 3, 6 or even 12 month contracts but they've earned their fare share after 4 years.

Another thing. If they want to hire "someone" on a fixed term, semi-permie basis, after four years will they still have to pay the agency.

Andrew

[BlasterBates]

Yes the handcuff does apply, however if the agency is rejected leaving you to twiddle your thumbs at home then the legal position does become less clear. The point is the agency isn´t offering you anything or paying some sort of retainer then preventing you from working maybe construed as anti-competitive, i.e. the handcluff clause will be harder to apply. It is a difficult one but if you have no other alternatives it maybe worth the risk. You might want to take legal advice.

If you could come to some arrangement with the client you could offer them some breadcrumbs from your reduced rate.

[SueEllen]

The handcuff clause definitely applies.

More so because you have been with the client longer than most contractors would stay with a client. Remember the agency's business model is to act as an intermediary for as long as possible so trying to argue they had their "share" isn't a valid contractual argument.

This is where opt-in/opt-out becomes important.

If you are opted-out properly then you have to wait at least 6 months before you can approach the client independently. That way even if you have a longer restriction clause you can argue that it's anti-competitive and a restraint of trade.

Obviously if you are opted-in due to your opt-out not being done properly you don't have to wait so long.

However regardless if you wanted to approach the client then I would ensure I had a solicitor readily available to fight the agency, as they would threaten both of you with legal action.

[TheFaQQer]

This is where opt-in/opt-out becomes important.

Who can remember whether the opt out was done properly or not four years ago?

I'd be more worried about the restriction clause between agency and client, which is what will probably scupper the idea of going direct.

[TheFaQQer]

If they want to hire "someone" on a fixed term, semi-permie basis, after four years will they still have to pay the agency.

Depends on what the contract between client and agency say.

More likely to have to pay than not.

[BoredBloke]

Does the agency get a lot of business from the client? Would they want to sour the relationship?

Speak to the agency and get the end client to investigate matters from their enm. Between the 3 of you there should be some common ground eg pay off the agent etc.