Is there a way to force agency and client on transparent commission..??

[Darren_Test]

Having seen many occasions pimps 'games' on closer to agreement stage, is there a way to force agency to be transparent about what they are paying to consultants with client..?? ie 'open book' policy..?

This will help Client to see lions share of their payments goes to consultant rather than to pimp's pocket..

[TheFaQQer]

The company with the power in the relationship needs to drive this and insist on transparency. Generally, they don't care though, as long as they are getting the right person at the rate that they want to pay.

Someone will no doubt be along saying "ah, but if they are paying £1000 a day and getting someone worth £100 a day, they won't be happy", which is why I said "the right person at the rate they want to pay" - if they are content then they generally aren't too fussed about what the agency is passing on to the contractor company.

[northernladuk]

Nah... Next.

[SuperZ]

The company with the power in the relationship needs to drive this and insist on transparency. Generally, they don't care though, as long as they are getting the right person at the rate that they want to pay.

Someone will no doubt be along saying "ah, but if they are paying £1000 a day and getting someone worth £100 a day, they won't be happy", which is why I said "the right person at the rate they want to pay" - if they are content then they generally aren't too fussed about what the agency is passing on to the contractor company.

Well, the company won't be content when their £1000 a day contractor buggers off because they find something paying more than their received £100 a day.
I raised this once at client co, the issue that there were two agents skimming off the top. Of the £400 contract, £200 was being offered to contractor. The client wasn't best pleased.

It's a scam when someone who lines you up some work and creams more than 10% commission, that's why some client co's will now insist on a 10% commission only to their preferred suppliers. THat's the way it should be IMO

[BrilloPad]

Its easier at renewal.

[TheFaQQer]

Well, the company won't be content when their £1000 a day contractor buggers off because they find something paying more than their received £100 a day.

Clients are never happy with people who jump from one contract to the next because they are offered a tiny increase. TBH, I'm not sure I disagree with them either.

[Darren_Test]

What p**** me off is agencies got too much control in the contracting process. They can make suddenly a candidate 'unavailable'!! They could also make a less competent (higher commission) candidate as the 'best available option'. I have seen agents playing too many games in the favouring candidates for reasons that benefits them. I do fear some client contacts even have some 'commission- sharing' agreements with agencies..??

This can't be right...

Yes, they are the intermediary got contact with the client co, but they are not the key player. Candidate/consultant who perform work should be in control. How can we take control in this process...?? What tactics to play to reduce influence of pimps in the selection process..??

[Lance]

Many more clients are tying the agents down to a fixed margin as part of the their PSL (preferred supplier list) on-boarding process.
Not even huge companies either.
That way an agency has to play 'fair' to get a sniff of placing any candidates.

Usually it's around 13% for candidates the agency find, and 6% for ones the client has found but prefer to put through the agency.

So convince your client that this model works better. They're the only ones who can make it happen.

[northernladuk]

What p**** me off is agencies got too much control in the contracting process. They can make suddenly a candidate 'unavailable'!! They could also make a less competent (higher commission) candidate as the 'best available option'. I have seen agents playing too many games in the favouring candidates for reasons that benefits them. I do fear some client contacts even have some 'commission- sharing' agreements with agencies..??

This can't be right...

Yes, they are the intermediary got contact with the client co, but they are not the key player. Candidate/consultant who perform work should be in control. How can we take control in this process...?? What tactics to play to reduce influence of pimps in the selection process..??

But are you absolutely sure they are doing these things? I don't think I've seen it and it is very bad practice so will unfold in the long run. Much better that an agent does good business with a client and secures a long term arrangement. They can do those things but I'd bet in a vast majority of cases they don't so you are making an issue where there isn't really one.

Maybe I am being naive but I've rarely, if at all seen this happen. I've had the silly stuff plenty of times, trying to nick 10% at the last minute, 2 references and all that which is just playing the game but I'm not so sure this is as big a problem as you are making out.

[moggy]

have you asked your agency what their margin is?