Comment by gaius
8 years ago
a major misfire in this whole story is that the employee in question was a short-term contractor.
A 3-year contract is a long-term contractor... Many permanent employees don't stick around that long.
8 years ago
a major misfire in this whole story is that the employee in question was a short-term contractor.
A 3-year contract is a long-term contractor... Many permanent employees don't stick around that long.
Sorry; I didn't mean anything formal by the "short-term" adjective phrase there. I meant "In contrast to a full-time employee, whom one assumes is making a career out of THAT company."
Three years is a long time in contractor-land, but it's a drop in the bucket for career company employee.
I think that what 'gaius is saying is that "whom ones assumes is making a career..." part is a wrong assumption, especially in this industry. "Making career" is more of an exercise of jumping between companies every other year.
If it had truly been a 3-year contract they wouldn't've had the renewal issue.
Want to bet it was structured as six 8-month contracts to dodge some legal requirement that you provide extra benefits to any contractor retained for three or more whole quarters? ;)