Uh what does this mean..
-
@Dashrender said:
Does the company have to pay the matching portions of FICA for those contractors?
Of course.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Does the company have to pay the matching portions of FICA for those contractors?
Of course.
OK I didn't expect that - to me that makes them full blown employees, and from my point of view, this is pure fraud against the investors.
Do those people count as employees? Like when a company says they have 80,000 employees?
-
@Dashrender said:
OK I didn't expect that - to me that makes them full blown employees, and from my point of view, this is pure fraud against the investors.
They ARE full blown employees. There are no half employees. To the IRS they are staff.
Do those people count as employees? Like when a company says they have 80,000 employees?
No, and they never call them employees even to the employees. Employees normally only find out that they are employees if they need to file an IRS complaint.
-
@Dashrender said:
OK I didn't expect that - to me that makes them full blown employees, and from my point of view, this is pure fraud against the investors.
It's like a birthday surprise. It's an industry standard way of protecting investors from themselves.
-
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
-
@IRJ said:
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
Apparently its not nothing... It's companies protecting themselves from investors....lol
-
I remember being young and dumb thinking that people are better than money hungry whores. Especially people that make millions, surely they could see the error in their ways?
One day I woke up and realized It will never change. It's either crap on someone or get crapped on. That's just how the world works. Humans are ruthless animals far more evil than crocodiles or sharks.
-
Lol crocs and sharks have no malice their only desire is to eat, not get ahead of other sharks and crocs.
Lol
-
@IRJ welcome to the non delusional part of adulthood. Idealism dies sometime in your 20s, as it should. By then you've seen how awful the world is, how terrible people are to each other, etc. Thumbs and feelings have doomed us all.
-
@IRJ said:
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
Yes, that is all that they do. that's why they earn only like 2%.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
Yes, that is all that they do. that's why they earn only like 2%.
Is it really only 2%?
-
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
Yes, that is all that they do. that's why they earn only like 2%.
Is it really only 2%?
Why would it need to be more? They get regular fees for simply being a payroll processor. The rest of the process is handled by the company itself.
-
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
Yes, that is all that they do. that's why they earn only like 2%.
Is it really only 2%?
It varies by contract, I know ones I've worked for were 2%.
-
@Dashrender said:
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
Staffing Agencies really seem to benefit. Most of the ones I have dealt with have very little technical knowledge and their internal employees have high turnaround. It seems like they are just in a race to bid against other staffing companies for positions. Once you staff a position, you sit on reoccurring income for doing literally nothing.
Yes, that is all that they do. that's why they earn only like 2%.
Is it really only 2%?
Why would it need to be more? They get regular fees for simply being a payroll processor. The rest of the process is handled by the company itself.
Fees? No, it's 2%.
-
My experience with staffing companies is that they get more than 2%. Most of the time I have worked with them I have been able to negotiate a higher salary. I know they have to have more wiggle room than 2% to allow negotiation on salaries.
-
@IRJ said:
My experience with staffing companies is that they get more than 2%. Most of the time I have worked with them I have been able to negotiate a higher salary. I know they have to have more wiggle room than 2% to allow negotiation on salaries.
Why? They simply pass the cost along to the company you really work for. I'd guess that the employing company and the staffing company have some sort of agreement of salary range for the position. Though if you think about it, assuming a straight percentage is how they are paid, it would be in the best interest of the staffing company to get all staff placed at the maximum rate the position allows.
-
@IRJ said:
My experience with staffing companies is that they get more than 2%. Most of the time I have worked with them I have been able to negotiate a higher salary. I know they have to have more wiggle room than 2% to allow negotiation on salaries.
When i worked for a large on, I know that the customer set the rate flat at 2%. They had no wiggle at all.
-
@Dashrender said:
@IRJ said:
My experience with staffing companies is that they get more than 2%. Most of the time I have worked with them I have been able to negotiate a higher salary. I know they have to have more wiggle room than 2% to allow negotiation on salaries.
Why? They simply pass the cost along to the company you really work for. I'd guess that the employing company and the staffing company have some sort of agreement of salary range for the position. Though if you think about it, assuming a straight percentage is how they are paid, it would be in the best interest of the staffing company to get all staff placed at the maximum rate the position allows.
Not if the customer sets the price. All depends on the contract.
