Conflict of interest

boardsuser1

Can anyone explain the following to me and explain how it is a conflict of interest?

Worked for a haulage company last year for 2 weeks.

I had to resign in my final day due to personal reasons.

No notice etc.

I was offered the same job with the same company today through an agency only to be told they can't place me there due to a conflict of interest.

I had no argument with anyone during my time there.

godtabh

KC161 wrote: »

Can anyone explain the following to me and explain how it is a conflict of interest?

Worked for a haulage company last year for 2 weeks.

I had to resign in my final day due to personal reasons.

No notice etc.

I was offered the same job with the same company today through an agency only to be told they can't place me there due to a conflict of interest.

I had no argument with anyone during my time there.

Sounds more like it's not in there interest to take you back. As you have explained it I don't see the conflict but I'd understand why they wouldn't want you back

_Brian

I think someone has just used the term incorrectly in this case.

I'd say they don't want you back as a result of you leaving and not working notice etc the last time you were there. It's fair enough really.

punisher5112

Like above. They are been careful as to not cause legal issues for themselves such as discrimination or whatever could come out of you complaining.

Might be best looking elsewhere as if you were taken on they could do same back or give you the worst of runs and hours.

thebiglad

Maybe agency mean they cannot place you in the role as they have something in their own contract regarding ex employees of the firm?

At the end of the day they are placing you in order to be paid for the service not for your benefit and so only care about that.

If you feel that you left on good terms and you now know there is a role available could you not approach the company direct and see if they will re-employ you directly?

boardsuser1

godtabh wrote: »

Sounds more like it's not in there interest to take you back. As you have explained it I don't see the conflict but I'd understand why they wouldn't want you back

I explained it exactly as it happened, i wouldn't try and deny I done wrong, I did.

I have no issue with getting work anyway, it was a choice of them or a job with a waste management company.

Naturally the non waste job was preferable.

boardsuser1

_Brian wrote: »

I think someone has just used the term incorrectly in this case.

I'd say they don't want you back as a result of you leaving and not working notice etc the last time you were there. It's fair enough really.

I agree, no issues there.

boardsuser1

punisher5112 wrote: »

Like above. They are been careful as to not cause legal issues for themselves such as discrimination or whatever could come out of you complaining.

Might be best looking elsewhere as if you were taken on they could do same back or give you the worst of runs and hours.

They know I'm the type of guy who goes by the book, start/finish times, breaks etc.

Shafting me wouldn't work for them as stuff would go undelivered.

boardsuser1

thebiglad wrote: »

Maybe agency mean they cannot place you in the role as they have something in their own contract regarding ex employees of the firm?

At the end of the day they are placing you in order to be paid for the service not for your benefit and so only care about that.

If you feel that you left on good terms and you now know there is a role available could you not approach the company direct and see if they will re-employ you directly?

I wouldn't say I left on bad terms, but I definitely didn't leave on good terms either.

I done all my deliveries the last day I worked for them, just parked the truck and left then.

The agency were offering better money than the company were directly.

snowflaker

KC161 wrote: »

They know I'm the type of guy who goes by the book, start/finish times, breaks etc.

Shafting me wouldn't work for them as stuff would go undelivered.

if you didnt give notice, how are you someone that goes by the book???

boardsuser1

snowflaker wrote: »

if you didnt give notice, how are you someone that goes by the book???

It was a family issue. I offered to forfeit my wages in lieu of the weeks notice.

Every other time I worked my notice.

As it was under 13 weeks of employment I didn't have no give notice and nor would they.

It was force Majeure

snowflaker

KC161 wrote: »

It was a family issue. I offered to forfeit my wages in lieu of the weeks notice.

Every other time I worked my notice.

As it was under 13 weeks of employment I didn't have no give notice and nor would they.

It was force Majeure

Why would you quit if it was Force Majeur?

13 weeks they wouldn't know that much about your traits etc

Stheno

KC161 wrote: »

It was a family issue. I offered to forfeit my wages in lieu of the weeks notice.

Every other time I worked my notice.

As it was under 13 weeks of employment I didn't have no give notice and nor would they.

It was force Majeure

Was this the company you posted about a few months back where you needed a day off and couldn't get it so you quit?

boardsuser1

snowflaker wrote: »

Why would you quit if it was Force Majeur?

13 weeks they wouldn't know that much about your traits etc

I needed a long time off as a result of what occurred. Bit difficult to explain publicly. The foreman had no issues, the Dublin bosses did.

punisher5112

KC161 wrote: »

I needed a long time off as a result of what occurred. Bit difficult to explain publicly. The foreman had no issues, the Dublin bosses did.

Its the usual your just a number.

Its a pity quite a few are like that.

boardsuser1

punisher5112 wrote: »

Its the usual your just a number.

Its a pity quite a few are like that.

I agree, it was a pity.

Again the foreman was well up for taking me back but had to run it by his superiors in Dublin.

He even apologised, which was kind of him.

snowflaker

And you got your p45 over refusing to drive over the registered hours also was that a different incident?

boardsuser1

Stheno wrote: »

Was this the company you posted about a few months back where you needed a day off and couldn't get it so you quit?

Different one.

boardsuser1

snowflaker wrote: »

And you got your p45 over refusing to drive over the registered hours also was that a different incident?

Different company.

I can only imagine what else I said in over 2000 posts.

snowflaker

So is that 3 different companies?

boardsuser1

snowflaker wrote: »

So is that 3 different companies?

Yup.

snowflaker

It surely would be strange to have arguments with people only there 2 weeks!

boardsuser1

snowflaker wrote: »

It surely would be strange to have arguments with people only there 2 weeks!

I didn't, i mentioned that near the start of the thread somewhere i think.

It wasn't a bad job, just personal circumstances intervened.

I'm starting a new job on Tuesday anyway on a temporary/full time driving contract with Panda waste.

snowflaker

Well good luck with the job!

boardsuser1

snowflaker wrote: »

Well good luck with the job!

Thank you

punisher5112

Hopefully it works out for you. Best of luck.

boardsuser1

punisher5112 wrote: »

Hopefully it works out for you. Best of luck.

Thanks

It's only temporary anyway i was told, so it'll do until something more sustainable comes along.

Had an interview today for artic work on a part time basis so i may be able to combine them without breaking the tachograph rules.

Avatar MIA

Yeah, the "conflict of Interest" is that the agency cannot make money off of you, because you are a recent ex employee.

However, why did you think the company would entertain taking you back considering (for whatever reason) they were content to let you go after two weeks work the previous time you worked for them - when they didn't accommodate your previous hasty absence?

boardsuser1

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Yeah, the "conflict of Interest" is that the agency cannot make money off of you, because you are a recent ex employee.

However, why did you think the company would entertain taking you back considering (for whatever reason) they were content to let you go after two weeks work the previous time you worked for them - when they didn't accommodate your previous hasty absence?

The agency proposed me for the position, i explained the history, they continued to proceed anyway.

As you said, the agency want to make money off me, i know the industry, i knew the company (irrespective of my history with them) and had everything else required.

No doubt the agency staff get commission for every person they secure work for?

Either way i'm going to Panda waste on Tuesday, i have had other interviews in the last 48 hours, so if any of those come up i'll run, of course i'll be polite and give appropriate notice, the last thing i want to do is get home stinking of refuse for the rest of my days.

The job is back home in Cork so i'l be packing my things and going back on Monday night.

Been here in New Ross for a while now but home is home, i was only looking at jobs in the 'real capital' anyway :pac:

Jim2007

KC161 wrote: »

The agency were offering better money than the company were directly.

Exactly and in such situations there is normally a clause preventing agencies from taking on ex-employees. Otherwise employees would just quit and rock up a few days later looking for extra money.

boardsuser1

Jim2007 wrote: »

Exactly and in such situations there is normally a clause preventing agencies from taking on ex-employees. Otherwise employees would just quit and rock up a few days later looking for extra money.

Very valid point.

2 agencies were recruiting for the same company.

One was paying €11 per hour, the other €12.

The company themselves were offering €100 a day before tax.

Start at 7.30, finish anywhere around 7pm.

Both agencies advertised the hours as 8-6.