It's not only Google but Intel, HP, Microsoft, Nike and MANY MORE Corps abuse...I mean use contractors. It's an issue the Federal govt needs to make a decision on imho. Look at the grubhub lawsuit in CA. Corp dont want to bring in full time people because they will have to pay them more, and give them all the benefits/perks etc.
Knowing Intel, they have a resolving door with positions. You can be a contractor for years in the same job and never be a full time employee. I.E A clear sign of misclassification. Intel has been getting away with it for years. They would rather bring in an H1B, or someone that fills a diversity quote than bring in someone local and pay them more. I've seen in over and over and over the last 10 years.
It’s not even just tech companies - one of my good friends is a video editor at one of the big cable news networks, and has been a 40-hour contractor for 7 years now, with others in the team being there longer.
It won't work. In the UK there's the same law, after 3 months a temp contractor needs to be given the same rights as a full-time employee, what happens? They get laid off at 11 weeks and replaced.
Arguably that is the way it is supposed to work. It means that any job in which the startup time (i.e. how long it takes to become “effective”) is relatively long basically can’t be fulfilled by temp positions. In other words, those types of jobs would need to be fulfilled by full time employees. Of course as you say the rest of people with more generic/widely applicable skills (which basically is a contractor) will be let go at week 11, but they should be able to find something else.
Of course the system isn’t perfect and surely some of those more generic skilled workers would prefer to stay longer, but it sounds like your description of the system is the way it’s intended to be.
“Senators demanding” is kind of strange. Senators have the ability to make laws that enforce new rules on the workplace. It isn’t really a “demand” if they aren’t willing or able to use their powers to make it happen. It is more like a “lazy request”.
Think of it as “doing due diligence”. They’re positioning themselves against what is seen as a worker-exploiting labor tactic that abuses a policy loophole, knowing full well that Google’s priority of bottom line profits will likely take precedence over acknowledging their request. If Google blinks and changes their hiring practices, state and federal labor regulators could pounce on the de facto admission of guilt and charge back pay with penalties and punish the rest of the contractor-abusers industry too. If Google does not blink, the senators can rightfully say that they tried to play nice and must now proceed to use their role as senators to altering labor law to make this abuse illegal. It’s not a “lazy request” so much as a “gauntlet softly thrown”.
13 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 49.9 ms ] threadWhat loopholes can Google use if this comes into a law?
Knowing Intel, they have a resolving door with positions. You can be a contractor for years in the same job and never be a full time employee. I.E A clear sign of misclassification. Intel has been getting away with it for years. They would rather bring in an H1B, or someone that fills a diversity quote than bring in someone local and pay them more. I've seen in over and over and over the last 10 years.
To clarify, this applies to agency workers. Not contractors.
Of course the system isn’t perfect and surely some of those more generic skilled workers would prefer to stay longer, but it sounds like your description of the system is the way it’s intended to be.