The New Blue Collar: Temporary Work
- Thread starter PandaBear
- Start date
- Status
Been watching it happen for decades...
I used to clean offices and toilets with my Dad years ago, 2 hours per night, 5 nights per week, out of hours, after everyone's gone home...that makes sense.
But why would a business outsource cleaners who work 8 hours per day 5 days per week, unless there's some other "efficiency" between them, their profit making subcontractor, and the schlep dragging the broom ?
To be fair, I think everyone expects "cost savings" means someone along the chain has to give up some income. Regardless of lost due to automation, wage suppression, owners going out of businesses.
Since my wife is declared permanent disability (12%) due to work injury, I'm very concerned that these heavy lifting works are done by people with no workers comp and is receiving government care after their injuries. I'm not debating whether government should be in the business of doing so (which may be political) but IMO temp work should follow the same rules for other industries and employees, which means paying workers comp.
At least in the US, if you are big you are a deep pocket in lawsuits. Tobacco companies, health insurance companies, etc all split up into smaller sizes just in case they are hit with class action lawsuits. They can always file for bankruptcy in one of the company so the plaintiffs' lawyers will not aim too big of a gun at them.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
But why would a business outsource cleaners who work 8 hours per day 5 days per week, unless there's some other "efficiency" between them, their profit making subcontractor, and the schlep dragging the broom ?
Last edited:
It's an article about freight lumpers. What's in the article is nothing new. The real tragedy is the corruption of how the lumper industry works and the kickbacks and "fees" dock bosses charge freight companies to have the privilege of them unloading their freight. It's one of the unseen costs of why prices are so high. Trucking companies are essentially forced to use lumpers because about 80% of the cost is a kickback to the people running the docks. ie, If a truck driver wants to unload freight himself, he gets paid maybe 40 bucks, but a dock will charge him a couple hundred to have a lumper unload the freight. The trucking companies will pay it, because if they don't, companies like Walmart won't use them and they'll find a different trucking company to use. Google "playing the lumper game".
Remember that the term "poverty" is not historically accurate in this case.
Sorry, but a "family" of 4 making 44,000 per year is not poverty. They may be "very low income" but that's not poverty. Or, $11,000 per individual. For example, college students regularly live with less income. And, do quite well I might add.
Not only that, but below that number, there is federal and state assistance. It's not much, but it's not historical poverty either.
Poverty in America is not at all the same as the abject poverty so common in much of the rest of the world, or, for that matter, by human historical standards.
People forget that even the most poor in this country have regular access to running water, toilets, soap, food, transportation, medical care and so on. Some even get home heating assistance!
Go back just 100 years and see what life was really like for the poor. There is a stark difference.
Originally Posted By: crinkles
It is how they massage unemployment numbers. A part time employed person may no longer be looking for work so the % unemployment is lower. I am not sure whether they adjust it for full time equivalent...
I don't see it as massaging unemployment numbers, but more of a way of a business not having to provide benefits or having to have anymore than the bare min of people coming in to work. I know the place I once worked at wanted to hire manpower people to come in and even if they didn't know a drill from a end mill he figured we would be able to make go/no go jigs and keep enough experienced people around to make the set ups and check up on the work being done. That kind of was the final nail in the coffin of deciding it was time to move on.
BTDT, the temp thing for a 3 year stretch 04-07 in between careers 3 and 4 . I was tortured by mirages of permanent full time work dancing in front of me. It was not a happy time.
Common practice of temp agencies is to string their associates along with the promise of eventual full time positions at the companies they are loaned out to, yet almost NEVER do you actually get hired on as regular employees. A BIG FAT SHAM OF A BUSINESS.
Once upon a time I work in a company that downsized from 500 to 20, and they try to get a contract from a big client that has concern about the ability to supply the volume they need. So, the day of visit they hired a bunch (30-50) temp worker to pretend working for the day.
The next day a lot of things went missing, and the client was not fooled. They went out of business a few years later.
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Once upon a time I work in a company that downsized from 500 to 20, and they try to get a contract from a big client that has concern about the ability to supply the volume they need. So, the day of visit they hired a bunch (30-50) temp worker to pretend working for the day.
The next day a lot of things went missing, and the client was not fooled. They went out of business a few years later.
That's a very dumb way of running a business.
We used to use temporary workers because we saved money on their benefits (employees get benefits, temporary employees do not). But when you run the numbers, the cost is the same as a regular employee because the agency has a profit margin in the labor cost.
Then there was an argument that it's easier to get rid of temporary workers. But it's as easy to fire regular employees - we did it all the time.
The only benefit to having regular employees is that in your accounting system you can hide the FTE and simply charge the dollars to "purchased services" line. But good controllers, if the system allows and the CFO does not object, will require to log the hours in the accounting system. The CFO-s usually want to have a clear picture of the FTE-s unless their bonus depends on it. The departments usually want to have the FTE-s but not show them in the monthly reports.
Union workers might be a little more difficult to fire so temporary employees makes more sense.Originally Posted By: 91344George
Originally Posted By: crinkles
It is how they massage unemployment numbers. A part time employed person may no longer be looking for work so the % unemployment is lower. I am not sure whether they adjust it for full time equivalent...
I didn't read the linked article, but the last few buildings I've built I've used just a mix of temps and independent contractors.
It's just a lot easier to give the contractor a check and get back a lien release, and let him worry about I-9's, withholding, unemployment, workers comp, wrongful discharge, discrimination, benefits, and all the other stuff you have to deal with when you employ people.
Ditto for the temp agencies, less the lien releases. If I don't like what they send, I tell them to send me someone else and they can hassle with it.
As the government makes it more and more difficult and expensive to employ people, this trend will increase. It will end when all the jobs are gone.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Win
As the government makes it more and more difficult and expensive to employ people, this trend will increase. It will end when all the jobs are gone.
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I guess that's the catch, the employee regulations for both full time and temp agencies need to be equal. Something like a temp agency has to pay for 35 hrs a week regardless of the amount of work they have contracted. Then the temp agency can't have a limitless disposable labor pool at their beckoning. Or something like that to even up the costs.
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I guess that's the catch, the employee regulations for both full time and temp agencies need to be equal. Something like a temp agency has to pay for 35 hrs a week regardless of the amount of work they have contracted. Then the temp agency can't have a limitless disposable labor pool at their beckoning. Or something like that to even up the costs.
- Status
Similar threads
