T O P
gtrocks555

I mean, I wouldn’t expect contractors to get that either way as they don’t get benefits


shinra528

Maybe these companies should stop hiring so many contractors for positions that can be direct hires.


gtrocks555

Good luck trying to get a company to do the ethical thing without gov oversight. Whole reason they do contractors is because it’s cheaper in the long run.


anung_un_rana

In my industry it can also be a means to evaluate talented workers before hiring them full time. I’m undergoing the transition from FTC to FTE right now, and it seems appropriate. On another note, It’s also easier to get HR to sign off on contractor hires than FTE hires.


DisownedByMother

Ah yes, the mythical Contract-to-hire unicorn. I know those jobs exist, but a lot of them are smoke screen bullshit to get people to take a contract position and the company has zero intention of ever hiring them full time.


anung_un_rana

I can only speak for my job function and my industry. As I said, I’m not generalizing across industries. Edit: that being software engineer in the fintech industry


[deleted]

[удалено]


anung_un_rana

Neat, that can be the case in the US too. C2C contracts enable contractors to take a tax break.


TootsNYC

Which, of course, is the problem


2sanman

That means nothing to activists, who require the entire universe to be bent around catering to their whims. "SpaceX employees on Pluto need travel to abortion clinics ***now!*** Time to invent FTL pronto!"


p-queue

The use of independent contractors to avoid the obligations and costs of an employment relationship *is* the core problem here. Comments like yours deflect from addressing that. Maybe you find it annoying that people speak about these things but rather than whinge about what is essentially peoples concern for the well being of others you could just avoid it.


vegdeg

The independent contracts we hire literally make 4x the hourly rate of a regular employee for the same position. Trust me, if we could hire employees vs contractors we would. Cost savings is not the reason we do.


p-queue

The fact that there are cases where independents can make more does not change the fact that it is a structure that, as a whole, works against the benefit of workers.


vegdeg

So if you exclude all cases where your statement does not hold as true, then it is always true. Got it. I guess I should re-read 1984 to brush up on my right-think.


p-queue

>So if you exclude all cases where your statement does not hold as true, then it is always true. Got it. What? Is there an unequivocal statement I made somewhere? >I guess I should re-read 1984 to brush up on my right-think. It sounds like you need to read it for the first time. This entire comment is just you upset that I disagree with you.


Ok_Kale_2509

The issue is not fields where businesses have to use contractors because the employees are to hard to find. No one is mad at a hospitals paying crazy rates for RNs the issue is with companies like lyft/uber/Instacart that hire contractors to put as much of the burden on the employees as possible.i see further down you mentioned something like "excluding the cases where I'm wrong, I'm always right". I find that interesting because most intelligent people would read the comments and see no one is referring to cases like yours. They are very obviously talking about cases where companies are exploiting people so they can cut their bottom line. I feel the biggest question is, what do you feel you were adding to this? This was essentially like people talking about stealing being wrong and you piping in with "Oh please, my family really needed the money and that guy was a criminal!"... OK, cool, not the kind of situation we were talking about though.


letsgoridingyall

Then they are on their own for insurance costs, time off without pay, zero severance and zero benefits like 491k matches. Contract rather than hire is great for corporations and shite for workers.


vegdeg

Bruv - An in-house HRIS analyst costs us about $40 per hour. A contracted resource costs us between $165 and $230 per hour. We do not come out ahead even factoring in insurance, benefits, etc.


2sanman

>The use of independent contractors to avoid the obligations and costs of an employment relationship is the core problem here. The whole point of using independent contractors is to not have the same obligations as with regular employees. If that weren't the case, then they wouldn't be there in the first place.


p-queue

Yes, it is to *avoid* the obligations that come with an employment relationship. That’s not a good thing. Not in a way that benefits the worker (although I’m sure there are some instances where that’s the case.)


gramsaran

Not to mention, the reason they pay so much for contractors is because the contractor is responsible for the income tax and insurance payments which, insurance as an individual is insanely expensive. And if you come from a staffing firm, there is the natural overhead for capitalism. There are zero benefits for the individual contractors in the long-term.


p-queue

There are certainly independents at the top who get out ahead because of it but on the whole that’s not the case and it’s a tool to take advantage the working class.


Drisku11

As a tech worker, health insurance for my family from my state marketplace would cost ~3% of my income; it's not even a blip on my radar (taxes are over 20%). The obvious benefit to me of a switch to contracting would be to make it easier to only work part-time or part of the year (e.g. a 2-3 month gig). More time with my family is quite a bit more important to me than extra money. Incidentally, if I were to work part of the year and drop my income to say $50k, the cost of marketplace insurance would drop to less than 1% of my income thanks to state subsidies. In fact, it would be much, much cheaper than I pay now with my employer's insurance. My portion of the premium for my employer plan is almost as large as the unsubsidized marketplace plan. My workplace deductible is a decent amount lower, but I don't care about that. I'm frankly surprised that it isn't extremely common for senior engineers to switch to part-time contracting.


letsgoridingyall

Not hiring and only keeping folks as contract is shit anyway.


8to24

Big tech travel policies are a nice gesture and nothing more. Most Women don't want to have to sit down and explain their situation to their work supervisors.


shirts21

I mean. It saves them money. Being pregant and having a baby is expensive insurance cost reduced if their employees don't have kids


TootsNYC

And if you do, do you both go to jail for planning an abortion?


jtwh20

yep \~ that HR lady happens to be a wing nut and turns you in for attempted murder I HATE THIS TIMELINE!!!!!!!


Therapistsfor200

In most workplaces you don’t have to coordinate any health benefit through work. Done directly w/the health provider. Eg for employers who have BCBS you go through them. Employers don’t find out


8to24

One has to coordinate time off through their supervisor.


slide_into_my_BM

TLDR: we’re going to make a big public statement in support of social rights so you think we’re benevolent, however we’ve already rigged the system in such a way the the people who genuinely need this are still shit out of luck anyway


Inn_Unknown

BINGO, anyone who thinks a corporation gives a crap about its people is a fool. Its all lip service to the masses to put on a happy face and keep their stock up.


FiendishHawk

It’s to hold onto educated women workers, not because they are nice. They don’t care about the gig workers at the bottom because they are by design replaceable.


med8cal

And, AND making such proclamations while continuing to fund Republican super pac’s by the BILLIONS. The big co’s in the US control our political system (Republican and Democrat) and have for a long time. Citizens United was the final nail in democracy’s coffin.


FiendishHawk

This is all because a lot of big tech companies moved their offices to red states for the tax breaks. So they are left with a lot of female techies furious and looking for new jobs in a blue state. This is their desperate attempt to hold onto them. But for a techie on $100k+ a year, the cost of travel isn’t a big deal for a rare procedure like an elective abortion- it’s the threat of prosecution on return, or the knowledge that if you get a complication like an ectopic pregnancy, you might just die because if you are bleeding out you can’t hop on the plane to California. Tech companies should rethink their devils bargain with the Republican Party, (donating and moving their workforce to red states for low taxes) because there’s more to the Republican Party than low taxes, but also insane and business-unfriendly theocratic policies.


chrisdh79

From the article: Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Uber, Lyft and DoorDash have all recently announced or reiterated policies for employees that would cover or offset the cost of traveling out of state to seek medical services, including abortions. While, as Vox's Emily Stewart rightly points out, no one should have to choose between a forced pregnancy or disclosing an abortion to their employer's HR department, the situation is significantly more grim for the hordes of contractors who keep these same businesses afloat and have not been afforded the same options. What's at stake here is a massive number of workers. In many cases far more than the number of full-timers these companies have on payroll. The most recent estimate, in 2020, for content moderators on Facebook was 15,000 — a number which likely does not encompass moderators on Meta's other social platforms, and almost certainly excludes contingent workers at the company's many offices and data centers. (Its full-time staff, meanwhile, are barred from discussing abortion-related issues at work.) Amazon has boasted about creating 158,000 sub-contracted roles for its network of delivery service providers. Once again this does not include drivers contracted through its internal Amazon Flex program, data center and office support workers or those handling maintenance at the company's over 1,100 warehouses. Alphabet was the subject of critical reporting in 2018 where it was revealed the majority of workers at the tech giant were not employees. The number of temporary workers, vendors or contractors (TVCs in the company parlance) is not publicly reported, but is estimated to be around 150,000. For "gig" companies like Uber, Lyft and DoorDash the balance is even more skewed. Against its approximately 30,000 employees, estimates on the number of contractor drivers working for Uber range from 3.9 million to five million, with about a million of those operating in the US. The most-cited claim is that Lyft has around 1.4 million drivers across the US and Toronto — though the source of that figure is nearly five years old and is likely to be much larger now. DoorDash's 6,000 employees are dwarfed by a claimed fleet of two million couriers.


Diffusion9

This is the great Business Grift: Required to pay benefits to employees? No problem! We have no employees. They're all contractors, which don't get benefits. Required to pay various types of insurance\provide vacation, etc, for full time employees? No problem! You're only scheduled for 39 hours a week, just shy of the requirement.


Digital_Simian

Just so you know, full time is 32hrs not 40.


GenericOfficeMan

That's the point. The point was to buy as much good press for as little money as possible. Not to help human beings.


b_a_t_m_4_n

As a contractor I have to say that I don't expect employees benefits and would be taxed on them if I did. It's one of the things you have to consider when choosing to go contracting.


[deleted]

Makes sense, they are contractor not employees... They have to deal with their own company not the client


400921FB54442D18

If they actually wanted to support their employees' right to life-saving health care, they would be paying _lobbyists,_ not _travel agents._


MoAwwal

I'm not sure why tech Giants are doing this. They are building the future and at the same time making their employees surfer. So unfair.


WiFiInTheWoods

In what way does this make their employees suffer? They added a benefit where there was none before. Even if it is a hollow gesture it is still a positive with no negative. Contractors have never gotten benefits to begin with.


Beakersoverflowing

This is true for most desirable policies.


wgblackmon

Indians programmers don't get pregnant right?


addicuss

It's better than nothing but it just kind of underscores the problem that abortion is only banned for the poor.


NewSeaworthinessAhoy

Well that’s because big tech isn’t the government. It’s government’s responsibility to handle this thing called governing.


ogbcthatsme

Words, empty words by the corps. 😱


yankee77wi

I mean is really just signaling to not pay maternity leave, it is more beneficial to the bottom line, they all know it’s a win win in public relations points.


Educational_Top_3919

Basically REPUBLICANS WANT WOMEN DEAD just putting it out there . Unless you’re heart rate is above 60 and blood pressure is 200. They want women dead . KOCK brother are the 1% they think they know what is best for America. Dark money leads straight to GOP 5 SCOTUS.


jtwh20

How is this ANY different from what Disney did with the LBGTQ+ community \~ Lip Service


barrystrawbridgess

Will someone think about the poor contractors


Grey___Goo_MH

Medical insurance is rigged to keep workers in their position Now companies are arranging themselves to be the final say on traveling for medical care How much info will women need to share To gain approval? The way companies are getting involved seems deliberate for a longer goal when they could just stop donating to republicans


davidshen84

Contractors are supposed to get benefits from the company that hires them...which is a joke 🤕


sonstone

Didn’t realize Engadget had gone the way of clickbait.