Permanent Contract Labor

In California, is an employer allowed to use contract labor (temps) for ever? Or, is there some legal obligation to hire permanent within a specified time limit?
Thanks

No, there is no legal obligation to hire as permanent within any specified period of time.

You are probably thinking of the Microsoft case, where the company was found to have people on a contractor status, who in all other ways qualified to be employees and were being left as contractors specifically to avoid granting them benefits.

That does not mean that every contractor is misclassified; that even if they are it is for the purpose of denying them benefits; or that the employer has any legal obligation to hire anyone.

If you want to present the details of your specific instance, we can offer an opinion.

Not any one particular instance. Where I work has approx. 230 employees. The owner likes to hire solely through the temp agency. I have temps under me that have been there 10 years. I argue to have some of them made permanent, to no avail. Can he keep getting away with it? These poor people do a good job yet, no insurance, no paid time off. It's aggravating.

3puttbob said:

Not any one particular instance. Where I work has approx. 230 employees. The owner likes to hire solely through the temp agency. I have temps under me that have been there 10 years. I argue to have some of them made permanent, to no avail. Can he keep getting away with it? These poor people do a good job yet, no insurance, no paid time off. It's aggravating.

Click to expand...

Get away with WHAT? You've been told it's not illegal. It's also not any of your business. If these people want paid time off then tell them to save their money and pay themselves when they need a vacation. If they want health insurance then tell them to pay for it.

Just like more than 300,000 other independent contractors in the IT industry in this country do each and every day.

You're mixing apples and oranges.

In the Microsoft case, they were not agency temps. These were people being CALLED contractors when they did not qualify. They had no protection and no agency looking out for their interests.

In your case, these people are employed by the agency (not the case with Microsoft). Just because your company does not provide them with benefits or paid time off does not mean they are not receiving them. Many, many agencies (in fact, by this time I'd say most if not all) provide these benefits to their temps.

If they are dissatisfied with the status quo, it is up to them to do something about it, not you. They know what benefits they receive from the agency. You don't.