Let's talk releases!

I have an issue with any requirement placed upon a agent to get the new FMO to agree to release back to the old FMO. If an agent is that stupid after learning about releases (and certainly would learn this from the old FMO) that he/she is still willing to sign a new contact without a pre-nup, then he/she deserves what is about to happen.

You can't offer a release with conditions. Then it isn't a release. If you (FMO) does not like where the agent is going, why should you block it?

Other than that, I really like Joe's idea (okay, I stated it a number of times) that a 90 day notice be given but allow the agent to continue to write business. After that, the release could be automatic.

I was likely the first to jump down Joe's throat and call him dishonest. He has apparently "seen the light" and is moving into the good FMO zone. He's almost there....

Rick
 
Rick I think you're missing the point, or I could be missing yours. It gives the agent the opportunity, more than 90 days, to change his mind should he find out he's made a mistake. Sometimes it takes longer than 90 days for you to realize you might should've stayed where you were. The whole idea behind it is to protect the agent from the "new" FMO. And it gives the "old" FMO a chance to reconcile their differences and maybe offer a better contract to that agent if they really want them back. If the new FMO isn't willing to sign something like that, then the agent is falling into the old "no release" clause again!!
 
Rick I think you're missing the point, or I could be missing yours. It gives the agent the opportunity, more than 90 days, to change his mind should he find out he's made a mistake. Sometimes it takes longer than 90 days for you to realize you might should've stayed where you were. The whole idea behind it is to protect the agent from the "new" FMO. And it gives the "old" FMO a chance to reconcile their differences and maybe offer a better contract to that agent if they really want them back. If the new FMO isn't willing to sign something like that, then the agent is falling into the old "no release" clause again!!
No, I do get it. If I'm an FMO, aside from granting a release, all I can do is suggest to the agent that he receives the same pre-nup from the new FMO. It's not my place to require that this happen in order to allow an agent to work where ever he or she wants.

I think all FMOs should automatically release. But all I can do is warn people to get a pre-nup. Can't require it as it I do not own the agent and the agent can do what he or she wants.

To paraphrase my feeling about government control; True freedom is not the right to do what is smart, it's the right to do what is stupid.

Rick
 
Agreed. And it's not like we're on the DNC list, so the "old" FMO isn't prohibited from calling us down the road and seeing how happy we are or are not!
 
I never implied that the FMO is deciding who or who not you can go to. If the new FMO wouldn't sign this little agreement, the agent wouldn't want to go with him anyway! So in that particular case, the new FMO is deciding for himself that he doesn't want the agent. Case closed, look for yet another FMO that would put it in writing.
I do understand what you're saying that it's still not an unconditional release, but in Joe's case, he's wanting to put rules on the release...well, if he's just gotta put a rule on it, then keep it simple and protect the agent as well.
 
Back
Top