HP Contract Workers Sue For Recognition

manganese4 writes "The Idaho Statesman is carrying the story of 33 local Boise HP contract workers suing HP. They claim that they were expected to perform at the same level of expectations as HP workers and thus should be given the rights and privileges of HP workers. HP claims the suit is without merit." From the article: "The suit seeks to represent 3,000 workers in Boise and elsewhere in the company and could involve as much as $300 million, according to the complaint."

Comments

They're right, this has no merit...

[garcia]

Jennifer Miller of Nampa is one of the plaintiffs. Miller said she was employed by HP in Boise from 1989 to 1995, when she took a severance package and left the company. She returned later in 1995 as a contract worker and worked at HP until March 9. Part of the time she was a contract employee through Veritest and Manpower Professional. Her jobs included testing software for HP printers.

Umm, I have never heard of anything like this before. Temp agencies hire employees, charge the companies their employees work at, and then pay (and give benefits if applicable) to their employees from that.

Since when are you owed money/benefits from a company you really don't directly work for?

Is it any surprise?

[AtariAmarok]

"Companies tend to have the nasty habit of using what they call contractors to get out of paying taxes and benifits that they really should be"

Is this any surprise? If the government makes you pay a higher tax for full-time employees, then this discourages hiring full-time employees. The same with imposition of benefits for such employees: it is the government providing a disincentive for hiring the kind of employees that would get these benefits.

Is it any surprise that the companies are responding to economic pressure from the government NOT to hire regular full-time workers?

Crybabies my ass

[A nonymous Coward]

On the one hand, the Big Business In Bed With Government mentality that runs this country wants to avoid any type of national health care. They insist that is a job for the private sector. They shut down Medicaid, medicare, any chance at national health plans. "See," they say, "your employer should provide that. It is not a proper job for government."

So I tell you what ... have you ever shopped for an individual health plan? Good god almighty that is expensive! You know how much less it costs when a company buys it for their employees? I swear it stinks. It's as if individuals are subsidizing businesses. It really stinks.

So people try to organize labor unions, like at Wal-Mart, or they try to get full time jobs, like at H-P, in order to get that health care. And guess what? Wal-Mart closes stores rather than deal with unions. H-P hires contractors to do the same work so they can avoid having to pay for health care.

You know, life sucks, but it doesn't have to suck that bad. That's why I applaud lawsuits like this, and consider those lawyers top grade on the morals scale, or at least they have better morals than the politicians and their corporate rulers who don't miss a chance to stick it to people who work for a living.

Re:I never understood..

[Macadamizer]

You hit the nail on the head -- it doesn't matter if a company calls someone a contractor or not -- they are a contractor if they meet certain criteria, otherwise they are employees.

You can look here for some information on how Idaho figures out if someone is an employee or a contractor.

Company's also like to classify people as "exempt" to avoid paying overtime -- but again, it doesn't matter whether the employer calls someone exempt or not -- it all depends on whether or not someone can meet the criteria of being exempt.

If these people really meet the definition of contractors, and are just now complaining, then the hell with them. But if they are really employees, well, that's why we have labor and employment laws.

I'm pretty much a free-market type of guy, but unfortunately you just can't put an employer and an employee on equal footing as far as bargaining power is concerned -- the employee almost always needs a job more than an employer needs to hire that particular individual -- so we have labor and employment laws to keep the employers from completely screwing their employees...