What a week so far

Tin_Man

So it seems like when it rain it pours. Not that I am complaining or anything. I just got off the phone with a company that I recently applied to, had a brief 10min phone interview that went great. Everything seemed to mesh quite well; HR emailed me the complete job description and wants to setup a face-to-face interview later this week.

However after looking over the Job details in bold letters it states "12 Month contract, Expires Nov 30 2010" I was kind of bummed out as this job sounded like the one I was looking for. Pay was good, all new(er) technology.

Negotiating salary, benefits, bonuses are the norm. How about changing the contract length to permanent? Or is that just not done? Sadly if its not then I'll have to walk away from this one

dynamik

It might lead to a permanent position...

tpatt100

I think they did that as their backdoor out.

Turgon

Tin_Man wrote: »

So it seems like when it rain it pours. Not that I am complaining or anything. I just got off the phone with a company that I recently applied to, had a brief 10min phone interview that went great. Everything seemed to mesh quite well; HR emailed me the complete job description and wants to setup a face-to-face interview later this week.

However after looking over the Job details in bold letters it states "12 Month contract, Expires Nov 30 2010" I was kind of bummed out as this job sounded like the one I was looking for. Pay was good, all new(er) technology.

Negotiating salary, benefits, bonuses are the norm. How about changing the contract length to permanent? Or is that just not done? Sadly if its not then I'll have to walk away from this one

Lots of contract to hire jobs offered at the moment. Economy.

veritas_libertas

Turgon wrote: »

Lots of contract to hire jobs offered at the moment. Economy.

Seems like all I see now in my area. All the calls I get are for 6 month contract jobs.

GT-Rob

whats wrong with a 1 year contract? Whos to say after a month you will even want to stay anyway (regardless of the contract term).


Also, perhaps its a 1 year contract that then goes to hire (or contract renewal). This is how AT&T worked when I was there, and 9/10 people were able to stay much longer.

Hyper-Me

Whats wrong with contracts?

People in IT have houses, families, and other financial obligations thet totally negate being able to take the chance on being cut a year down the road.

In some cases it wouldnt even matter how well you did the job, if the company was losing revenue they would cut you "because they can".

This contract to hire crap is spreading like wildifre.

Tin_Man

I've thought about it and I will speak with HR in the morning about the terms, If it is in fact juts a "1yr deal" then I'm walking. With a Mortgage & a family to look after I can't take the chance.

I could never understand why in the IT field it is common place to see contract to hire job's. Over 70% of the job's I've looked at between yesterday & today have all been, 3mnth, 6mnths, 12mnths contract's. Seems like Full time is going away. Such a shame really.

Hyper-Me

I really have to wonder if there is an increasing amount of frauds in IT.

I know i work with a lot of people that can't even begin to function in their job role properly, but we dont let them go because its public sector so the rest of us are left to cover their share of the work. Something that I dont think would go over well in most corporate settings.

crrussell3

Hyper-Me wrote: »

I really have to wonder if there is an increasing amount of frauds in IT.

I know i work with a lot of people that can't even begin to function in their job role properly, but we dont let them go because its public sector so the rest of us are left to cover their share of the work. Something that I dont think would go over well in most corporate settings.

I hear ya there. I am a contract employee in the public sector. In the User Support Desk where I am at, 4/6 people working there combined knowledge doesn't touch my own (an no I am not a know it all either). One has been called into the CIO's office way too many times, but yet he still has a job because of the union and the fact they don't want to loose a person as they aren't sure they can hire back due to the budget and economy.

Too bad they can't get it through their heads that paying idiots an outrageous amount of money is hurting them more than its helping.

GT-Rob

Hyper-Me wrote: »

Whats wrong with contracts?

People in IT have houses, families, and other financial obligations thet totally negate being able to take the chance on being cut a year down the road.

In some cases it wouldnt even matter how well you did the job, if the company was losing revenue they would cut you "because they can".

This contract to hire crap is spreading like wildifre.

Right, because if you are hired on you are guaranteed a job for life there! No ones to say you can't get laid off after 1 year anyway.


I agree that being on a contract does have disadvantages, especially when it comes to benefits (which in Canada isn't as bad as the states), but to some people a job is better than no job.


If I was running an IT shop I would do contract to hire. You can't always tell if you have useless employee until a few months down the road, and its much easier to get rid of them. If they are worth keeping, you hire them on. I think its very fair.

zen master

Is it really that hard to fire a permanent employee in the private sector in the United States? Can someone explain what makes it so difficult?

mikej412

zen master wrote: »

Can someone explain what makes it so difficult?

Wishful thinking. I'm still a contractor and I've out lasted, out played, and out worked a whole bunch of former employees.

Unless you have one of those outrageous union contracts (or executive contracts), as long as an employer isn't letting you go for an illegal reason (race, ***, religion, etc) you pretty much can be escorted from the building by security right now in most states.... so stop reading and get back to work!!!