Double Godlike!
You need to have an honest chat with the hiring manager, in order to try and understand why this is happening.
"The agent has said you aren't paying them, but I've got a handcuff clause. I'm obviously concerned but feel between a rock and a hard place on this. Are you able to shed any more light on it?"
Last edited by LondonManc; 2nd December 2020 at 19:50.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist
More time posting than coding
Correct but there is a relationship between them, even if it's over non payment. It's messy. The client haven't attempted to terminate any agreement, they've asked the contractor to swap. That action in itself is pretty unusual so I've a feeling any professional advice given might not apply here. But still the client is still in contract, the agent hasn't been booted out so currently handcuff could still stand.
Very messy so don't think there is a quick answer to the situation.
I think just the threat of it is enough at the moment with so many unknowns in a complex situation.
'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!
In my view the handcuff clause is untenable if the agent is expecting you to withdraw from the contract. It would be an abuse of the clause given they can no longer honour the contract. If you're worried take some advice from a lawyer, but the agent has a weak case. This is a dispute between the agency and the client.
However what you need to consider is that the client isn't paying the current agency so why would he pay the next agency.
I'm alright Jack
By pausing the contract, the agency is in effect in breach of contract. The payment dispute is nothing to do with the contactor. I would say the point at which the agency pauses the contract is when the handcuff clause ceases to be valid. Having said that it could be legally messy so the best options would be to either persuade the client to pay the agency or jump ship into a completely different contract.
Last edited by BlasterBates; 2nd December 2020 at 23:26.
I'm alright Jack
I'm not so sure that's true. Using that argument then every project where a cobtracote didn't get paid so rolled their sub contractors off would end up in court.
There is no obligation to provide work, bearing in mind the contract is with the agency so doesn't it apply to them? Normally client doesn't provide it but there is no relationship between he client and contractor so technically the agency passed that lack of work on? Its really always between contractor and agency. Just doesn't look like it.
Last edited by northernladuk; 2nd December 2020 at 23:39.
'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!
Double Godlike!
Contractor Among Contractors