Posts
"James Stoeckmann, senior practice leader at WorldatWork, a professional association of human resource executives, believes that full-time employees could become the minority of the nation's workforce within 20 to 30 years, leaving employees without traditional benefits such as health coverage, paid vacations and retirement plans, that most workers take for granted today."
Here's the article:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/01/news/economy/contract_jobs/index.htm
Seeing as how we are all about to enter the workforce, some of us in a matter of weeks, I feel like this hits home because we've grown up expecting to get these benefits from our future employers but now it's looking a little grim for the future of these kinds of extras. Thoughts?
Until there is growth and recovery from the recession, there is simply no way many businesses can offer benefits. Not only are many of these companies struggling to stay afloat, but health benefits have gotten more and more ridiculously expensive. It is much cheaper for them to simply not give out benefits. This lowers their labor costs immensely, and business is all about cutting costs wherever possible.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI feel that a lot of these reports of doom and gloom ignore the nature of employment. As long as there is demand for skilled labor there will also be a scarcity. As long as that is the case there will be a need for employers to compete for the best employees. That competition has in the past taken place in the realms of monetary and non-monetary compensation. In the future employers will continue to compete, health care may no longer be part of this scheme, but if that is the case employees will expect compensation sufficient to purchase their own health care insurance.
ReplyDeleteEven though employers will compete for the best employees, it's the matter that the competition has become so much more broad. With everyone submitting materials to a certain job posting and having more people vie for an opportunity, it makes it all the more difficult for the company to weed out qualified/competitive applicants, and many companies don't have the time and resources to devote to such exhaustive searches. I think that's where they're trying to go towards the seemingly more "efficient" way of hiring temp/contract workers. They don't need to spend as much time on the search since it's not a full-time worker, there's less risk.
ReplyDeleteI however would think that a company would want to spend time to gain a dependable full-time employee, but I guess the costs of associated benefits outweigh the quality of work the company could gain.
It seems like this is going to be the case for many businesses until their profits start going up again but I feel like companies need skilled workers and that they will find other ways to give them benefits. Not all benefits need to come in terms of health insurance, higher pay, and vacation time..some people could negotiate other terms.
ReplyDeleteWell, I don't know if this prediction is accurate, but it's certainly scary. Also important to remember that the unemployment rate we usually hear quoted (U3) doesn't count people who work part time and are seeking full time work. If this trend continues, the U3 rate will continue to fail to paint an accurate picture of the economy.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that this is accurate because many part time jobs today offer many benefits (such as Bank of America, Stryker, etc.) However I think we will adjust if we do not see any more full time work, and that our standard of living will continue to decrease.
ReplyDelete