Employee for 6 months ?!?!?!

[northernladuk]

Totally get that but there surely has to be something about that set up that can be challenged. It's not how the rules should be used.

there is no security of employment with perm until you have been there 2 years anyways, thats the way the employment tribunal rules etc work

[CoolCat]

And to counter the thread about the possibly positive request for a managed service on jobserve I get this steaming pile in my inbox.

6 month gig as a perm employee of an Addecco subsidiary providing service to their client. I haven't seen this set up for a long time although it has been discussed on here in the past. I remember Spring providing contractors to Barclays as an employee of Spring. I'd have hoped that model would have died a long time ago but rather worryingly it's popped up again.

We did discuss this as an option where agencies would start up consultancies to provide contractors to their clients and how that wouldn't work as it's still the end clients decision but this one goes one step too far and attempts to provide an employee of their for 6 months. There is something seriously dodgy about this, as there was the Spring one. I remember when the Spring gig ended the 'employee' had a month to find more work and if they couldn't they were made redundant.

This has to be sailing very close to the law surely. It just takes the piss to employ someone for a 6 month gig.

I do hope this is a very short lived approach and dies a very quick death.

there is no security of employment with perm until you have been there 2 years anyways, thats the way the employment tribunal rules etc work

[Cirrus]

Get used to the New Britannia

Welcome to Singapore-on-Thames

[northernladuk]

We need JTB here. One person to take one of these on, be made redundant and then taken it to a tribunal to end this once and for all.

Surely its going to be easy to win. Creating a permanent position that's temporary and using redundancy once its finished is taking the piss.

[KinooOrKinog]

And to counter the thread about the possibly positive request for a managed service on jobserve I get this steaming pile in my inbox.

6 month gig as a perm employee of an Addecco subsidiary providing service to their client. I haven't seen this set up for a long time although it has been discussed on here in the past. I remember Spring providing contractors to Barclays as an employee of Spring. I'd have hoped that model would have died a long time ago but rather worryingly it's popped up again.

We did discuss this as an option where agencies would start up consultancies to provide contractors to their clients and how that wouldn't work as it's still the end clients decision but this one goes one step too far and attempts to provide an employee of their for 6 months. There is something seriously dodgy about this, as there was the Spring one. I remember when the Spring gig ended the 'employee' had a month to find more work and if they couldn't they were made redundant.

This has to be sailing very close to the law surely. It just takes the piss to employ someone for a 6 month gig.

I do hope this is a very short lived approach and dies a very quick death.

This is how I remember things working way way back in the day when I was an office temp, years before I got into IT. I was signed up with several employment agencies - like Kelly Services or Reed - and became an employee of each of them. I would phone round on a Friday lunchtime to find out if any of them had work for me the following week. Sometimes I was with a client for a few months, other times it was maybe just a week or even a day. I put my timesheet in on a Friday and got paid the following week. I got paid an hourly rate and the agency just charged a mark up on that to the end client.

The only difference was that they were finding me the work, not the other way around.

[GigiBronz]

All employment is going to go this way once companies realise they can get away with this model for all their hiring requirements.

At-will employment, works for the USA.

[Paralytic]

All employment is going to go this way once companies realise they can get away with this model for all their hiring requirements.

Well, it works for footballers and look how rich they are!!!

[NotAllThere]

I remember when Spring were called Myriad.

[eek]

All employment is going to go this way once companies realise they can get away with this model for all their hiring requirements.

A lot of care companies already have, because they need to do everything possible to keep costs low.

[eek]

And to counter the thread about the possibly positive request for a managed service on jobserve I get this steaming pile in my inbox.

6 month gig as a perm employee of an Addecco subsidiary providing service to their client. I haven't seen this set up for a long time although it has been discussed on here in the past. I remember Spring providing contractors to Barclays as an employee of Spring. I'd have hoped that model would have died a long time ago but rather worryingly it's popped up again.

We did discuss this as an option where agencies would start up consultancies to provide contractors to their clients and how that wouldn't work as it's still the end clients decision but this one goes one step too far and attempts to provide an employee of their for 6 months. There is something seriously dodgy about this, as there was the Spring one. I remember when the Spring gig ended the 'employee' had a month to find more work and if they couldn't they were made redundant.

This has to be sailing very close to the law surely. It just takes the piss to employ someone for a 6 month gig.

I do hope this is a very short lived approach and dies a very quick death.

Nope, it ties with a comment I've just made in the umbrella forum.

Agency workers have the same rights as permanent members of staff after 12 weeks. To avoid that you want those people on payroll a distance away from the agency. This approach does it without the hassle of umbrellas.

Oh and I expect to see far worse before this story finishes. It's why I know what I'm doing and just stocking up on

[ladymuck]

How does this differ from a 6-month FTC?

Not much probably but it's the wording that's iffy.

[ladymuck]

All employment is going to go this way once companies realise they can get away with this model for all their hiring requirements.

[BackupBoy]

And to counter the thread about the possibly positive request for a managed service on jobserve I get this steaming pile in my inbox.

<snipped>

I do hope this is a very short lived approach and dies a very quick death.

How does this differ from a 6-month FTC?

[northernladuk]

And to counter the thread about the possibly positive request for a managed service on jobserve I get this steaming pile in my inbox.

6 month gig as a perm employee of an Addecco subsidiary providing service to their client. I haven't seen this set up for a long time although it has been discussed on here in the past. I remember Spring providing contractors to Barclays as an employee of Spring. I'd have hoped that model would have died a long time ago but rather worryingly it's popped up again.

We did discuss this as an option where agencies would start up consultancies to provide contractors to their clients and how that wouldn't work as it's still the end clients decision but this one goes one step too far and attempts to provide an employee of their for 6 months. There is something seriously dodgy about this, as there was the Spring one. I remember when the Spring gig ended the 'employee' had a month to find more work and if they couldn't they were made redundant.

This has to be sailing very close to the law surely. It just takes the piss to employ someone for a 6 month gig.

I do hope this is a very short lived approach and dies a very quick death.