Termination Of A Contractor

sangie595 wrote: »

I am aware of that. But they are depending on an agency to process the payment and the agency controls the contract. So actually, not all that different at all. And certainly not in the context of my comments, which relate to how one manages to continue to generate work when one cannot retain work for more than a few months.

I pulled you on the fact that you were confusing an agency worker with a contractor. Very very different things.

By replacing "contractor" with "agency worker" you concluded that a contractor could be replaced by simply phoning the agency.

That is not the case. An agency worker will work for an agency who have a contract to supply X workers to a company - for example admin staff, thus agency workers tend to be replaceable quickly. A contractor will have been specifically interviewed and chosen for their skillset and many agencies will typically have submitted many CVs to the company, of which they will interview several. This process usually takes several weeks, minimum. Hope that helps you understand the difference.

The agency does NOT control the contract. If the contractor walks or gets terminated, then the company will go back to the open market again, speak to whatever agencies have suitable candidates and start the process again. There is rarely an onus on the company to deal with one agency.

sangie595 wrote: »

The OP is not an independent contractor with a direct relationship with the employer.

Yes, he IS. He has already told us that he has his own limited company. HE manages the relationship with the company (perhaps badly in this case) and HE has the direct relationship as its him there on site. The agency merely perform a middle man role and take a percentage.

sangie595 wrote: »

Please don't confuse how agencies get around the employment rights now conferred on agency workers by calling people contractors with the problem of keep getting sacked.

There is absolutely no confusion on my part as the O/P is clearly a contractor.

From what has been posted in this case I would say OP is a contractor. Whether or not he is a competent contractor or whether he is managing his limited company and administrative affairs well is another story but the definition of the nature of the way he is / was working with the client and how he is raising invoices fits that of a contractor.
This is opposed to an "agency" worker eg someone on minimum / low wage doing a relatively menial role, whose payroll is dealt with in house by the agency together with other features such as a quick bulk hire and fire and placements without interviews.

So, now that we have defined that he is a contractor, we can determine that he is not "employed" - it is not a job, there is no "line manager", there is no "dismissal" or getting sacked. It is a business to business relationship where the client has decided to terminate the contract.
Unless explicitly indicate in the contract there is no payment due from the client for time not worked. If you have evidence that you have done th work then submit your timesheet and you will be paid for that time. You would not be paid for "notice period" if you as a contractor have already left, because the period has not actually physically been spent at the client site performing work.

Clients can generally terminate contractors with no notice. That is the nature of the relationship. There is almost always no further payment due after the contractor finished working, unless specicifally stated in the contract with words to the effect of "the contractor will be paid for their services at the agreed rate during the entire duration of this contract regardless of whether the client requires their services or not"

So my answer to the original question would be no you don't get paid for the remaining time on the contract because you physically haven't been on the client site performing work for them during that remaining time.

OP performance during his various contracts would perhaps a seperate subject.

Bogalot wrote: »

Setting up a limited company does not in itself make you a contractor.

OP sees himself as a contractor, that doesn't mean he is. A previous thread suggests he is in a relatively junior role in insurance. He ain't a contractor!

Hes billing the agency through his limited company, for his day rate. He is an employee of his limited company.

Therefore he is a contractor.

End of.

dranzer01 wrote: »

I will be getting paid my seven days notice this friday

Fair enough then. :beer:

If you are a contractor, your client can just not give you work.

You either leave or wait it out until they give you work.

A 'contract' with a contractor on a day rate isnt really worth the paper its written on.....

Tax man would be very interested in any clauses that force them to pay you as that would be akin to been a permmy.