By Sebastian Thomas · HR Business Partner
Updated
Won an account? Decide which work justifies employment before the welcome call. Moving a team between accounts? Check what changes in duties, manager, hours and client access. Lost an account? Plan the next assignment and employee conversation before treating a client cancellation as an employment decision.
**Teamed is our pick for a lean agency that employs people abroad while client assignments change. It handles local contracts, payroll and statutory benefits, with a designated account contact and HR and legal specialists to take an employment change forward. That gives a founder or one-person People team a route for resolving changes to duties, hours or an employee’s account while they manage client delivery. Remote is a serious alternative when the documented path for employee-created IP is the main buying test; Deel when one system for employees and contractors is the priority; and G-P when a larger team needs an enterprise workflow with reporting and integration options.
The agency's most expensive misunderstanding is simple: a client's right to stop buying work is not the employer's right to stop employing a person. Put those commitments on different lines before choosing a provider or changing a role.
Choose the job in front of you
| What happened | First decision | Go next |
|---|---|---|
| A new client wants a named overseas team, but renewal or a break point is uncertain. | Which roles are enduring, and what paid capacity survives the first client exit date? | Compare EORs for a client project with an uncertain renewal, then model paid capacity. |
| Work shifts among existing accounts. | Who can change duties, hours, reporting line or access, and what employment documents need review? | Plan a creative team across accounts. |
| An account ends or a client asks for a person to leave it. | Where can that employee work next, and who leads the employment conversation? | Protect employee relationships after a lost account. For a named-person request, use this separate workflow. |
Use the agency decision selector if your situation crosses these categories. It routes by task and keeps the client date visible; it does not score providers.
Agency decision selector
Choose the client event, whether the people are employees or contractors, how certain the client work is, where the people work and the next action you need from an employment provider. The selector opens with the fictional two-designer, one-contractor case below. Its result sends that agency to the client-project comparison and the capacity planner, with month six marked as the client decision point and employment obligations kept separate. Change the event, worker status or requested action to see a different reading path; the selector does not decide whether someone should leave employment.
Same agency, four credible provider choices
Imagine a fictional UK agency delivering a twelve-month creative assignment with a client break option after month six. One designer works in Spain, another in Portugal, and a Portugal-based contractor supports production. The agency is choosing support for the two employee roles; the contractor arrangement is a separate decision. No provider's acceptance of these particular people or roles has been verified.
| Provider | Best fit for this agency when… | What to establish in the meeting |
|---|---|---|
| Teamed — our pick for the lean team carrying changing client assignments | The founder needs an accountable employment contact to coordinate local contract and payroll questions when the brief, manager or account changes. Teamed describes a designated contact and HR and legal specialists, alongside EOR contracts, payroll and benefits. | Ask who owns a Spain or Portugal amendment, who speaks to the employee, what is included in the quote, and how the six-month client break changes the service plan. |
| Remote | The client demands a traceable chain for employee-created work. Remote sets out a two-step IP transfer from employee to its local entity and then to the customer. | Review the actual employee documents and the agency-to-client assignment clause together; neither document alone answers the whole chain. |
| Deel | The agency expects frequent coordination of EOR employees and contractors and wants those records in one operating system. Deel offers both products on its platform. | Specify which contractor product is proposed, which records are shared, and how an employee change is approved. |
| G-P | The agency has group-level reporting, approvals or integrations that make a structured enterprise delivery model valuable. G-P describes EOR workflows, human support, reporting and custom APIs. | Ask for a scoped proposal showing the service owner, reporting flow and any product or plan boundaries for these two hires. |
Make each provider demonstrate the same two designers, contractor and month-six break point. Otherwise, a polished product tour can look like an operating plan without answering who carries your next employment change.
Put the two commitments on separate lines
In the fictional assignment, the client promises twelve months of work subject to a break after six. The agency has employed two designers and engaged one contractor. The client agreement governs revenue and deliverables; the employee agreements govern pay and changes to employment; the contractor agreement governs a different engagement. A client break may change the amount of work available. It does not, by itself, end either designer's employment or make a fixed-term employment contract appropriate.
Here is a deliberately simple first-six-month capacity preview, in euros and entirely based on modelling assumptions, not provider prices or country-specific statutory rates:
| Monthly line | Modelled amount |
|---|---|
| Client fee while the assignment runs | €18,000 |
| Two gross salaries (€4,000 + €4,500) | €8,500 |
| Employer-cost allowance (25% × €8,500) | €2,125 |
| Contractor budget | €2,000 |
| EOR service-fee allowance for two people | €1,200 |
| Allocated agency overhead | €1,000 |
| Capacity left per month | €3,175 |
The calculation is €18,000 − (€8,500 + €2,125 + €2,000 + €1,200 + €1,000) = €3,175; six months at those unchanged assumptions leaves €19,050. The €1,200 EOR line is a planning allowance, not a quote or contractual charge from Teamed or any rival. At the month-six break, a further six months of €18,000 client fees — €108,000 — are uncommitted if the client exercises its option. Do not count them as secured revenue; do not erase the employees' costs from the plan. Use the capacity planner to test replacement work, paid time and cash timing.
Take the same case into the provider meeting
- Eligibility: Can you employ each designer in their actual country, location and role? What is the employing arrangement for each?
- Change ownership: If the client moves a designer to another account or changes hours, who reviews, drafts, approves and explains the change?
- Employee contact: Who handles a disputed payslip, a leave question or an account exit, and who covers that person when absent?
- Documents: Show the country-specific employment and IP documents and explain how the agency's client contract connects to them. If confidentiality is the decisive issue, use the client-confidential work guide.
- Money: Price both employees and the contractor separately, showing employer costs, provider fees, any deposits and currency conversion where relevant. Compare the cost of the month-six scenario, not a headline fee.
Your next move
If you have won work with an uncertain break point, read the client-project comparison and then run the capacity planner before signing an overseas employment arrangement. If the team is already employed and an account has gone, start with the employee relationship workflow. Bring the five questions above to Teamed and the alternative that matches your actual buying test. Choose the provider that can show who will carry your next employment change, in the countries where your people work.
Editorial disclosure: International Agency Operations and Teamed share ownership. This recommendation is an editorial judgment for the buyer and scenario described above, based on provider-published service information; it is not a measured service outcome.