Temporary into permanent contract - procedures and timing

TOTAL

Hi

To those of you that are familiar with today's corporate personnel practices to find out the best way to deal with what is about to happen in my job.


After two months of a three month contract, I my employer has proposed to turn it into permanent.

My concerns are as follows:
- although the newly created role will be basically about the same thing I am doing, the name of the role will be different; the role name and the responsibilities have been allegedly "just sent through to the HQ", but the manager refused to disclose any details at all - even though I acknowledged that the final thing would yet have to be created by the geographically distant HQ
- the mention of the future contract coincides with the company's plans to dismiss my colleague, who has been doing the most time consuming and monotonous data input; even she, being much less qualified, says one could hardly think of a more pointless and less exciting job than that
- the role will be officially announced as an internal vacancy, which means that there will be more contenders - and should I lose this race, I will be jobless

To sum up, I am feeling that the company is playing poker. It is okay as long as I do so as well. Having read between the lines, I have a hunch that the contract would be in place not sooner than in month seven, contrary to what is being suggested - month 5, however, in any case, the clock has started ticking.

Now, what to do about it?
Here is my plan; please feel free to share your experiences, comment and advise.

I think that the most urging thing I need to do is to get back to the job hunt, in which case I need to come up with a good reason why I am searching for something if a permanent role is due. Although everyone, I guess, can understand that until I have the contract signed, nothing is guaranteed, I wonder if this reasoning should not be presented in a more diplomatic fashion.

Q1. Is it totally legitimate to play open cards with recruiters?

Q2. What to communicate to my manager when I am going to be away from work for half a day with regards to job interviews? Given that the role is going to be made available to other staff, I think I have every right to do my search without hesitation?

Q3. Is it a normal practice for a company to do internal recruitment in such a case, or should I consider it as a demonstration that they feel they have the upper hand? If the latter, what could I do about it? I am checking because numerous staff have made it totally plain that I have done even much more than was hoped for; what I did was I restructured the internal processes, so that everything is running smoothly, flawlessly and I am actually doing many specialised tasks that are not my responsibility; I can see that through this, the company are checking my limits, and so far - this is what I am hearing, I have been succeeding in every area.

Q4. In an ideal world, unless the company is in a slump, the new role should offer me better money (they are dismissing a part-time employee, they are paying more to the agency) and higher responsibilities. How can I tell the business and financial condition of my employer?

Q5. If a company pays an agency a certain amount for me, what would be max they would be able (not necessarily willing, but at least able) to pay to me?

Q6. If I am selected, 0 being my grade starting salary and 1 being one grade higher, what is the max that can be negotiated as a starting salary? Are there any rules?

Q7. What is the cycle of recruitment in today's companies? Assuming they would want me to start permanent in September, when would the role be actually forged? I have an inkling that is a bluff that they have sent a role request even before speaking with me.

Thanks a lot. These are very detailed, numerous and specific questions, I realise. I would greatly appreciate any help including some guidance in terms of where to search, what to read and whom to ask.

Caroline_a

To try to answer your questions -

Q1.

Is it totally legitimate to play open cards with recruiters?

- I have no idea what this means.

Q2 - Take this as it comes. If you have an interview, say you would like an afternoon/morning off. Give as much notice as you can. You should have accrued some holiday now - speak to your agency about this.

Q3 - Totally depends on the company. Don't take it personally, if that's what they do they won't be changing it for you!

Q4 - Temp to perm (depending on the role) normally means you will get paid less. Again it depends on the circumstances. The last time I went temp to perm I took a drop in salary as I'd been working long hours and paid overtime for this - as a permanent staff member I got no overtime paid.

Q5 - Who knows? No hard rules on this.

Q6 - See answer to Q5

Q7 - See answer to Q5 and Q6.

You seem to be totally overthinking this. Apply for other jobs you like. As a temp you can leave when you want. Apply for the perm role if you want. Companies will not change their procedures for a temp member of staff, sadly you are not important to them, or even a member of their staff!

sangie595

You have been there an entire two months and have 22 to go before you have any employment protection. What makes you think that you are that important to them? The job isn't yours and hasn't been promised to you, but you are already working out how much more money to ask them for. They don't feel they have the upper hand - they have the upper hand!

Caroline_a

sangie595 wrote: »

You have been there an entire two months and have 22 to go before you have any employment protection. What makes you think that you are that important to them? The job isn't yours and hasn't been promised to you, but you are already working out how much more money to ask them for. They don't feel they have the upper hand - they have the upper hand!

Not even that - he's a temp, so doesnt even work for the company, he works for an agency!

TOTAL

Thanks both. I am aware that companies have their procedures, which do not serve the best interest of new employees at all - or not more than with their competitors.
I do not agree, though, that companies have the upper hand in that until a contract is signed, both parties are free to leave the negotiation. Just as you may not be employed, you may look for something else. I find it a matter of courtesy if not proper business conduct to notify the other party upfront that not all the conditions may be acceptable.

Long term, it is not about how quickly you become permanent, but how well you choose the company you bind your fate with, and it apart form the pay, it is the quality of the assignments that are going to be looked at in terms your employability by the employers who come next.
The reason why I find it important to at least try checking the room for negotiation is because I see it as one of the ways to tell the managers how you can contribute best.

My aim is to find out if - take this assertion as you like - when an employee turns out to be highly valuable and hard to replace, how flexible the stiff rules can become. Granted, companies have their experts with lots of overlapping skills, however, their roles are more or less fixed, and you don't make your higher ranked staff do trivial tasks of a different department without affecting how they will believe the quality of their work is perceived. You can get apprentices to do that for you, but the amount of management and training that you will need to put into it makes the return on investment hard to be positive.

If there were no flexibility on on the part of the employer, job negotiations would be a misnomer. This is what you appear to be suggesting, at least with regards to temp to perm context - and I acknowledge your view, which, however, does not overlap with mine completely.

Having witnessed in UK the pay grade being raised up one level in the middle of a temporary contract, the pay being raised by a grade in the course of recruitment conversation (unprovable in a forum talk, but please do not discard this), i believe the to be sufficient evidence that playing it more daringly - as much risk as causes - is possible to work for you as much as two years' worth of moving along path that is laid out as the only one.

Once again, thank you for your input. I take it as a well-intentioned voice of commonsense and would welcome others will contribute as well.

marliepanda

They're advertising it, it's not 'your job' you say yourself if you 'lose the race' you'll be jobless.

Therefore, why do you think you're 'highly valuable and hard to replace'

Caroline_a

when an employee turns out to be highly valuable and hard to replace

This is a really, really mistaken way to look at yourself. Everybody, without exception, can be replaced. I thought you were in an admin role - believe me, good admin people are 10 a penny!!

Regarding salary negotiation, most companies have a set budget for roles. Large companies will tend to be less flexible unless the candidate has particular skills to bring - one example is for a sales role where the candidate has previously worked with similar customers to the company's.

One of the things you are missing also is that you don't work for the company - you are employed by an agency.

sangie595

marliepanda wrote: »

They're advertising it, it's not 'your job' you say yourself if you 'lose the race' you'll be jobless.

Therefore, why do you think you're 'highly valuable and hard to replace'

Quite. Since there is no legal requirement to have any recruitment process, then if you are all that valuable, then the job is yours already. If that isn't on the table, then there are potentially a limitless number of equally valuable people. And if the OP believes that a signed contract is that binding, they clearly don't have much experience of employment or the empires position in employment.

OK if you really think that setting out the terms you will accept before you even have a job offer is courtesy or proper business conduct, then you are being naive. If, and it is a big if, the terms are negotiable you don't even attempt to negotiate until after an offer had been made. And the only grounds on which an employer will negotiate is that they find your skills and experience are too valuable to lose - the amount they pay the agency has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Lots of companies pay agencies amounts that are more than they might, or even will, part an employee. They do so for reasons that suit them. "Highly valuable" and " hard to replace", unless you are talking about a niche agency, are phrases that do not go alongside "agency temp". These are the sorts of people who don't need interviews, or, if they have interviews, they are non-competitive and the individual is more likely interviewing the company to decide if they want to work for them.

Plus, if the manager needs all those permissions from the far flung HQ before they can breathe, then they don't have the authority to start negotiating terms. They will be told what the job is, what the terms are, and the limits of their budget - if, indeed, they have any budget at all.

By all means be as daring as you like. But from the sounds of your post you are not all that valuable, not offering unique skills and experience, and have little experienced of employment in the UK. So don't be surprised if your daring strategy concludes with, as you said, unemployment. Relying on the evidence of two situations which occurred for temporary workers, without any deeper understanding of the UK employment situation, the personal circumstances, or the company rationale, is foolhardy.

Addendum
Sorry, but I have just been through your posting history. You appear to have been in the UK for not quite two and a half years. You have a spotty history of minimum wage administrative roles of a temporary nature, and seem to consider much of the work that is offered to you to be beneath you. You also say that the only qualification you have is useless. Here is some really good advice. You are nothing special and there are thousands of you out there. If someone offers you employment, you grab it with both hands. The time to negotiate is when you have demonstrated what you are worth to the company. This is not that time. Apart from any other consideration, investing in Eastern Europeans, who may not have the right to live and work here in the next couple of years, may make an employer think long and hard about whether it is worth employing you. And from your point of view, you require stable and reliable employment, because you can be quite sure that the people who don't get the right to stay here will be the ones without employment. It is already hard enough for eastern Europeans, so don't make it harder on yourself. Whatever your entrepreneurial history in your home country was, it obviously counts for next to nothing in the UK. If it did, you wouldn't be in minimum wage jobs.

Undervalued

TOTAL wrote: »

I do not agree, though, that companies have the upper hand in that until a contract is signed, both parties are free to leave the negotiation. Just as you may not be employed, you may look for something else. I find it a matter of courtesy if not proper business conduct to notify the other party upfront that not all the conditions may be acceptable.

For virtually all purposes, whether an employment contract is signed or not is irrelevant.

Undervalued

TOTAL wrote: »

Q6. If I am selected, 0 being my grade starting salary and 1 being one grade higher, what is the max that can be negotiated as a starting salary? Are there any rules?

None whatsoever providing you are being paid at least the national minimum wage! Beyond that it is entirely a matter for negotiation although most larger organisations will have fairly fixed pay bands. However, generally they will have a mechanism for sidestepping this in exception circumstances such as "head hunting" situations.

lincroft1710

sangie595 wrote: »

Quite. Since there is no legal requirement to have any recruitment process, then if you are all that valuable, then the job is yours already. If that isn't on the table, then there are potentially a limitless number of equally valuable people. And if the OP believes that a signed contract is that binding, they clearly don't have much experience of employment or the empires position in employment.

OK if you really think that setting out the terms you will accept before you even have a job offer is courtesy or proper business conduct, then you are being naive. If, and it is a big if, the terms are negotiable you don't even attempt to negotiate until after an offer had been made. And the only grounds on which an employer will negotiate is that they find your skills and experience are too valuable to lose - the amount they pay the agency has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Lots of companies pay agencies amounts that are more than they might, or even will, part an employee. They do so for reasons that suit them. "Highly valuable" and " hard to replace", unless you are talking about a niche agency, are phrases that do not go alongside "agency temp". These are the sorts of people who don't need interviews, or, if they have interviews, they are non-competitive and the individual is more likely interviewing the company to decide if they want to work for them.

Plus, if the manager needs all those permissions from the far flung HQ before they can breathe, then they don't have the authority to start negotiating terms. They will be told what the job is, what the terms are, and the limits of their budget - if, indeed, they have any budget at all.

By all means be as daring as you like. But from the sounds of your post you are not all that valuable, not offering unique skills and experience, and have little experienced of employment in the UK. So don't be surprised if your daring strategy concludes with, as you said, unemployment. Relying on the evidence of two situations which occurred for temporary workers, without any deeper understanding of the UK employment situation, the personal circumstances, or the company rationale, is foolhardy.

Addendum
Sorry, but I have just been through your posting history. You appear to have been in the UK for not quite two and a half years. You have a spotty history of minimum wage administrative roles of a temporary nature, and seem to consider much of the work that is offered to you to be beneath you. You also say that the only qualification you have is useless. Here is some really good advice. You are nothing special and there are thousands of you out there. If someone offers you employment, you grab it with both hands. The time to negotiate is when you have demonstrated what you are worth to the company. This is not that time. Apart from any other consideration, investing in Eastern Europeans, who may not have the right to live and work here in the next couple of years, may make an employer think long and hard about whether it is worth employing you. And from your point of view, you require stable and reliable employment, because you can be quite sure that the people who don't get the right to stay here will be the ones without employment. It is already hard enough for eastern Europeans, so don't make it harder on yourself. Whatever your entrepreneurial history in your home country was, it obviously counts for next to nothing in the UK. If it did, you wouldn't be in minimum wage jobs.

^^^^ This ^^^^