Contract with recruitment agency instead of the employer?

gigglemuch82

Hi

I'm starting a new job soon with a much better salary package and a promotion from my currency position.

I was informed during the interview stage that it would initially be a 5 month contract with a view to be made permanent. One of the people who interviewed me, in fact, started the job on a contract 6 weeks previously and she was made permanent on the 5th week.

Now the recruitment agency tells me that the contract will be with the recruitment company for the duration of the contract employment and that I will sign a permanent contract with the employer once I'm made permanent. The agency also said that I will be on their payroll until the permanent contract.

I find this a bit weird - is this a normal practice?

I also have another job that I have a second interview for this week with a very reputable US company and it is very likely that they will offer me the job - slightly less money and an awkward position to commute to but possibly really good on the CV. This position is also initially on a contract but I believe the contract is with the employer.

Signing the contract with the recruitment agency made me feeling a bit weird about the whole thing and I'd like to know if this is a common practice?

Thanks!

adrianw

Yes, it is common practice. I have worked for several companies and was paid by through an agency.
Sometimes it is a way of getting around a moratorium on hiring, other reasons is the hassle for the employer, the agency get an ongoing fee instead of a lump sum.

You will submit time sheets to the agency but that's the only difference.