I am relatively sure it isn't, but it's a step on the right track at least.
Of course. I wasn't implying that the situation I came up with is the norm or anything remotely close to the general image of the thing - I was just illustrating my point. There are plenty of wealthy people who have worked hard and patiently for their entire lives who are entirely responsible for securing their own financial safety net, and they deserve the satisfaction they get from that entirely. There are many impoverished people who stay that way and live off of unemployment and charity and the like, and I don't think that's fair either. BUT, I do feel that the social cost of carrying people who are going to slack is worth the price we have to pay, if it means that the hard-working, honest people who can't afford healthcare but surely deserve it have a chance to get it.
I'm pretty sure the President addressed this in his address.
For the past 10 years, the factories in my area (pretty much the only decent paying jobs available without a college education), higher people only as temps. As a temp you receive no health care coverage.
After a period, they are expected to hire you on full time, yet they have found loop-holes. For example, to rotate the temps, by laying them off in sequence, and calling on them later to come back.
I went through this for about 10 years, constantly putting in applications for full or part time work like the rest of the temps. 1 in 100 or 200 were ever hired. None ever received health coverage or any other benefits that full-time employees receive. For example, we got 1 day of paid vacation for Christmas day, while the full time employees got more than a week. Either way, we didn't get work, since they shut down for the holidays. So, 10 days off no pay during Christmas. Thanks.
I'm so glad I don't have to go through this any more. I was lucky and got hired by my brother.
Oh, really? Because 10 years ago, I worked as a temp at a factory that manufactured parts for GM and Ford. September 11 and the war that followed caused the factory to close down.
Right. I was an employee of the temp agency. This means instability, no guarantees, and very little benefits.I might work at one factory for a month, and if I'm lucky and do well, I get another assignment at another factory that needs help during the holidays or to handle increased business. A health care plan was offered, but it comes at a high cost. With no guarantee that you will be working next week, it doesn't pay off.
Then why don't you work FOR the temp agency? (I'm being sarcastic. Obviously they have employees and there has to be other employment. There are utilities, infrastructure jobs, etc etc) I have a hard time believing the "only" employers use ONLY temp agencies for staffing.
It doesn't make sense for a temp agency to offer a lot of benefits because the employees are temporary. The whole idea behind working temp isn't to stick with the agency for years. I worked for temp agencies as well and left the ones with no opportunity. I also left a region with poor job outlook because of this (and even there, there was work to be had if you were willing but just nothing I wanted or was willing to do)
It's not loop-holes, it's designed that way because they're not in the business of having permanent employees. A temp agency is designed to have a rotating staff that some it places into permanent positions, others who work there until moving elsewhere. I don't know of many people who would ever stick with an agency (or agencies) for upwards of 10 years.
They have employees that have been there for years, but it's true, 50% of the staff is temps. That way they don't have to worry about any benefits. They spend a half hour or so training you, then you are just a replaceable part to them.
