(no title)
rem7
|
6 years ago
From your second example... that sounds like it’s going to affect construction workers too... a lot of contractors just hire construction workers day to day to expand their workforce. Would that become illegal or is it different in construction?
bryanlarsen|6 years ago
ansible|6 years ago
I'd argue that if you deserve benefits like everyone else.
Especially ridiculous is the situation some people I know of are in. They are working two or three part-time jobs because they can't find a full-time position. The places that employ them have many part-time positions, and fewer full-time positions. And these people don't get benefits.
So you've got people who are working 40+ hours a week, for employers who have enough hours to work to have full-time employees, but instead have part-time job openings instead.
All so that the employers don't have to pay for benefits.
breerly|6 years ago
This will force companies to hire more employees, true, but at the cost of a much smaller overall workforce. Remember that cost is a constraint for businesses.
Depends what is more valuable from a human + capitalism perspective, fewer work opportunities that pay better or more competition and “starter/flexible” work overall.
ThrustVectoring|6 years ago
It's a subtle distinction, but one that I suspect would survive legal scrutiny.
nradov|6 years ago