Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheYeti1775" data-source="post: 5361474" data-attributes="member: 20914">Yeah it's bit hyperbolic, but you get where I'm going with it.Actually on a Employee side, yes.&nbsp; It's more beneficial benefit's wise.Company side it's a maybe situation.There are some projects that would be longer or much shorter than a normal contract length.&nbsp; Also with contracts you don't have the flexiblity in assigning new things to the individual.&nbsp; My job for example as a contractor, I'm tasked per the contract to Project A.&nbsp; Guess what if you want me on Project B, its redo the contract time or there is a clause about $$ for additional work.Yup definitely puts them in the catbird's seat.That is why they also get away with the annual layoff.&nbsp; Again, the advantage of being the 800lbs gorilla.Actually you neglect the tax incentives for 'creating work'.&nbsp; Many of the tax benefits at a local level as well dictate hiring 'full-time employees'.Would have to beg to differ for being the only good reasons.Case in point, the big three auto manufactures used to use layoffs in the event of factory retoolings and what not.By using the layoff, and the fact the retooling was taking 6+ weeks it made their 'former employees' eligibile for all their unemployment benefits.&nbsp; Had they simply said a work furlough, the employees wouldn't have been eligible for any benefits.&nbsp; As long as it took more than 6 weeks than the employees remained eligible and could be 'rehired' back to the line again.&nbsp; Though this has been changing in the last 20 years.We as customers don't know everything that happens at WotC.So we can only speculate why they do it.Than shake our fingers at them and ask why knowing they won't answer when they do it again.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheYeti1775, post: 5361474, member: 20914"] Yeah it's bit hyperbolic, but you get where I'm going with it. Actually on a Employee side, yes. It's more beneficial benefit's wise. Company side it's a maybe situation. There are some projects that would be longer or much shorter than a normal contract length. Also with contracts you don't have the flexiblity in assigning new things to the individual. My job for example as a contractor, I'm tasked per the contract to Project A. Guess what if you want me on Project B, its redo the contract time or there is a clause about $$ for additional work. Yup definitely puts them in the catbird's seat. That is why they also get away with the annual layoff. Again, the advantage of being the 800lbs gorilla. Actually you neglect the tax incentives for 'creating work'. Many of the tax benefits at a local level as well dictate hiring 'full-time employees'. Would have to beg to differ for being the only good reasons. Case in point, the big three auto manufactures used to use layoffs in the event of factory retoolings and what not. By using the layoff, and the fact the retooling was taking 6+ weeks it made their 'former employees' eligibile for all their unemployment benefits. Had they simply said a work furlough, the employees wouldn't have been eligible for any benefits. As long as it took more than 6 weeks than the employees remained eligible and could be 'rehired' back to the line again. Though this has been changing in the last 20 years. We as customers don't know everything that happens at WotC. So we can only speculate why they do it. Than shake our fingers at them and ask why knowing they won't answer when they do it again. [/QUOTE]

Verification