• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Temps and 1000 hours

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

T

Technocrat

Guest
What is the name of your state?

I am from California and work for a local water agency. We are not state funded.

During the past 2 years we have been using temporary labor to fill a badly needed position. Unfortunately the powers that be claim every year, for the past 3, that they are going to create a real position. But for one reason or another they have not. So we have been filling the void with temps. The position is technical support, with many specialized areas taken care of. Training of a new person usually takes 1 to 2 months. This temp position is at least 30 hours a week, but we generally had them work 40.

For one reason or another, the temps did not work out and were let go, long before the 1000 hour mark. This usually meant a lot of training on my part and lost time. We finally found a wonderful temp last year. But as was getting close to the 1000 he found a better job and left. This was a loss for us because this person was great at there job and would have been the perfect person to keep on board. Which were told at the time might be a possibility because again the promise of a real position was made.

So we went to our Human Resources department and discussed with them how we could keep a person on board for longer, in hopes they would last till a real position was create and a new person, hopefully the temp, was hired. It would also cut down on the amount of time it took to retrain someone, plus there would be some comfort in have the same person around for a long period. The revolving door of temps was starting to become a problem with some of the employees.

The director of HR told us that if we got someone from a temp agency and everything was done through them (payroll, benefits, reviews, etc.) then the 1000 hour rule did not apply. I don’t know how correct this is, which is one of my questions. We got clarification on this a number of times as we started the process of finding someone. Every time we were told the same thing, its fine. So in Feb. we did. But today he came and told us that our current temp is getting close to 1000 hours and we will need to let him go. Again we have found some one we really like and want to keep. Despite our constant assertion that he told us differently, he claims to have never said that. So it doesn’t look good. We really want to keep this person till at least the end of the year.

So I guess I have two questions to go with my novel.

First, is what the department head said true? If you hire a temp through an agency in California and they take care of everything does the 1000 hour rule not apply?

Second, is there ANYTHING we can do to keep this person after 1000 hours? He wants to stay and we want to keep him. Can we get him on contract? Can we hire him as a temp through us? Anything?

Thank you for your time.
 


cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Maybe you should start out by explaining what 1000 hour law you are talking about?
 

Beth3

Senior Member
1,000 "rule"? I can only guess that this employer's benefit plans (particularly their retirement plan) are written in a manner that requires participation be offered after an employee has worked 1,000 hours.

Either that, or company management is under some major misperception that there's a law that requires an employee be made "permanent" after 1,000 hours. We've seen a lot of confusion on various boards about that in the wake of the Microsoft decision.
 
T

Technocrat

Guest
Ah.....the way they make it sound it seemed like it was a law. We are a member of California PERS (http://www.calpers.ca.gov/). Is it possible that it is a part of their rules that temp employees can only work 1000 hours and then they must get retirement?
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
It's possible. What I can tell you is that there is NO law in CA or any other state that requires a temp to be hired/made permanent/given benefits after 1000 hours.

Without knowing what it is that makes your management believe there is a 1000 hour "law" it is impossible to answer your questions. If it's only a company policy you can change it whenever you want; if it's written into your retirement plan it can be done but it's a far more complicated process and you'd have to follow it until the changes were made and ratified.
 
T

Technocrat

Guest
After some quick online research it does appear that it is PERS that is causing this. If a temp works more than 1000 hours in a 12 month period they become eligible. :( Personally I would just give this person those perks.

Do you think that the PERS rules apply even if this person is employed though another company? Everything is handled by them.

Is there any current way of keeping this person? Contract etc?
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Technocrat, without knowing EXACTLY where this is coming from, there is simply no way for us to answer this. I'd have to see the actual policy/plan document that is creating this issue before I could give you any kind of opinion.

Since it appears to be a contractual issue as opposed to law, no one who has not read the contract can answer what exceptions there are/are not available.
 
T

Technocrat

Guest
Ok I will try to find more information and post it.

Thank you for your help so far.
 

BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
This whole discussion is rather moot since the temp is NOT an employee of the water company but of the temp agency filling the placement and is therefore under the temp agencies policies and procedures.
 
T

Technocrat

Guest
So do you think the PERS rule does not apply since this person is part of a temp agency?
 

BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
Depending on the exact wording of the agreement, (unless it specifically includes outside contractors under the umbrella of another firm) then no. It will not apply.

Read it carefully and look for language such as 'part-time employee' or 'temporary employee'. This person is not your company's employee. They are a third-party.
 
T

Technocrat

Guest
Just so I am clear the agreement with PERS or with the temp agency?
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
It depends ENTIRELY on EXACTLY what the PERS "rule" says.

If it's written into the retirement policy, which is heavily regulated at the Federal level, that ANYONE who works 1000 hours is covered, then the fact that the temp is hired from any agency matters not one whit and the PERS rule DOES apply. (And yes, I have seen that happen and we had to cover agency temps who qualified until we were able to re-write the retirement policy.)

If it's written into the retirement policy but it specifies EMPLOYEES of the water company, then the PERS rule *probably* does not apply but the EXACT wording matters.

If it's not written into the retirement policy but is still in the contract, then again the EXACT wording matters.

This is NOT going to be resolved on a message board. I don't mean to be rude, I wish I could help more, but there is simply nothing more we can do for you to solve your problem. Only someone who has read the ENTIRE document in question (whatever it turns out to be) is going to be able to answer it. And it has to be the entire document; you could post what seems to you to be the relevant paragraph but there could be another statement several pages further on that affects it. This is beyond the scope of these forums.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top