Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While even these jobs are better than no jobs, long-term, I do think this alternative way to hire has major social implications, as millions who would have found a path towards becoming permanent employees with benefits don't.
While that involves more employer risk and costs more, the latter is only true because your competitor today no doubt employs perma-temps. If you employ permanent employees, you are at a cost disadvantage. If your competitor could not use perma-temps, hiring perm employees would not put you at a cost disadvantge.
I worked as a temp for a few years. There were pros and cons. I got a ton of experience in different industries, networked (and made some personal friends that I still talk to today) etc. But being a temp is financially difficult. Many times you cannot get healthcare through the agency nor are you paid what you are truly worth.
I agree with your assertion about the implications such a practice would have.
The unions are doing it also, the brake company in my town uses Manpower and there was temps that worked 2 years thinking they would get hired. I just love the BS a shop mgr/boss spews when they tell you if you do a good job we will hire you. After a couple of times of hearing that I have caught on and I just do enough with no extra frills.
Sounds like Chicago Lock who moved here in Pleasant Prairie years ago. My buddy was hired as a temp forklift operator, and asked about getting hired FT by the company, and they told him the same thing you were told. He was doing the work of 2 people. He finally tired of the run around and went back to driving a cab.
Let me also add I hope this is a lesson to people who believe companies will do the right thing towards the workers without unions. Companies will do anything they can get away with in order to cut costs and maximize profits. We need unions and we need workers' voices to push back on the companies.
Let me also add I hope this is a lesson to people who believe companies will do the right thing towards the workers without unions. Companies will do anything they can get away with in order to cut costs and maximize profits. We need unions and we need workers' voices to push back on the companies.
I honestly don't know how my kids are going live. There is no permanence, my eldest has been a "perma-temp" since graduating from college and floats from project to project in her industry. In November she was hired by a company to be an employee, but no benefits or anything the first 6 months to a year, and even then they only pay when they have work. And as she found out yesterday, the current work is finishing up this week and it might be a month before they put her on another project. In the meantime, no pay. Hopefully she will find something along the line, or maybe change careers once she has a couple more years of work experience.
I went back to work recently after a long time of being a SAHM but it's called "temporary/part time". I can work up to 1000 hours a year, no benefits. This is a city job, something that used to be considered a career path. I'll probably have to leave at some point to get permanent work with some sort of stability that will let me make more money even if the benefits are slim to none.
You have Obama and ObamaCare (and the Democrats who rubber stamped his agenda) to thank for this situation. No one else. It is going to be very difficult to return to the prosperity that we once knew, where one might work for one company his/her entire working life, and retire comfortably. I'm afraid those days are gone, and Obama even wants your 401k now.
You have Obama and ObamaCare (and the Democrats who rubber stamped his agenda) to thank for this situation. No one else. It is going to be very difficult to return to the prosperity that we once knew, where one might work for one company his/her entire working life, and retire comfortably. I'm afraid those days are gone, and Obama even wants your 401k now.
I didn't know Obama was president from 2000-2005 nor did I know Obamacare existed then. Gee, you learn something new everyday.
This is nothing new. Ever hear of Manpower, or other temp agencies? They've been at this for a long time, providing temp workers to fill vacancies for big business, and not having to pay any benefits or offer any whatsoever.
The difference is that (at least back when I was working, before becoming self employed) when we needed a temp, they really were temporary positions. They were extra help needed for specific reasons which were temporary. A special project might require additional help in production/assembly, for example, in order to meet the delivery requirements of a product. I remember that the company I worked for hired a couple of engineers on a temporary basis for one project. When the product was delivered, we were back to our normal staff of engineers. This applied to other departments too, on occasion, for example, technical writers to complete the documentation for such a product.
But today, when a business faces huge cost increases if it employs 50 or more people, and must keep hours to under 30 per week, everything is changed. It's now a fight for survival. Many may simply close their doors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJiveMan
Now, many temp agencies have sprung up, and employers {businesses} have been getting into the same act.
There's no such thing as loyalty in the workplace any more. Unless of course, it's a union shop, and now unions are under attack by corporate America.
Union employee's have no company loyalty. They are loyal to the union. They couldn't care less about the company. They see the company as the oppressor, the exploiter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJiveMan
Companies deciding to shutter their doors, regrouping by filing bankruptcy, and starting over, while blaming unions for breaking their backs, when in fact, it's poor corporate management and exorbitant corporate executive salaries that are to blame. One perfect example of this is Hostess, and Sensata.
Unions demand far too much in pay and benefits. It has gone way beyond a "value for value" situation. They aren't even reasonable. Everybody knows this.
And it isn't because corporate executives salaries are too high. The market sets those salaries, just as the market sets the pay of hourly employee's (you union thugs refer to them as 'workers'). Yes, occasionally the blame is poor management. But that isn't always the case, and in the case that it is, if there was any company loyalty, as you claim union "workers" have, they would be willing to give a little to maintain their jobs, and help the company get back on it's feet. The fact that there is no such willingness shows that there is no loyalty.
I have no sympathy for the Hostess union thugs. Let them enjoy their unemployment. They got what they deserved. Besides, the unions have enough money to take care of them the rest of there lives. Let them pay those people. The unions have billions of dollars, and they haven't paid a dime in taxes on that money.
In the workforce present day, corporations need it done fast and cheap, for their bottom lines, and screw the employees in the process. There's no such thing as good employer/employee relations any longer, it's dog eat dog.
That is precisely the problem with union employees. That is your attitude. It is based on a false premise. You have been brainwashed to think that way. It has never been my experience as a non-union employee. My employers have always treated me fairly, I was always advanced, as my performance and skills enabled me, and I always received increases in pay, which were fair and substantial.
But lack of company loyalty does not create a the kind of working relationship that is beneficial to a company. Such an employee should not expect an employer to offer him any more than payment for the value received. Such an employee should not expect to be considered for advancement when higher positions become available (and every company I worked for promoted from within). That's the way it works, and that is what the union "worker" doesn't understand.
I didn't know Obama was president from 2000-2005 nor did I know Obamacare existed then. Gee, you learn something new everyday.
Sorry, but I thought this thread was referring to the current trend in employment. Am I wrong?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
