juldea: (makeup)
[personal profile] juldea
So I just spoke to the big boss here, and he said that the chick I'm temping for requested even more time gone, that one of his options at the moment was to open the position to new hires, that he planned on doing this, and that he wanted me to apply. In other words, the short form of, "We'll hire you to do this if you want it, but we have to go through the formality of accepting applications."

Roxxor.

The only thing up in the air is how much it will pay. I'm okay with going lower than $13/hr if I get benefits, but I won't go below $9. And it will kind of suck to be making less as a real employee than as a temp (which is what I suspect will happen).

Oh, hrm, I guess that whole idea of the hospital having to pay the temp agency is also an issue. I wonder if there's a way to get around that. Just not tell the agency, and say that I found another job? I guess if the hospital has no problems with it, I don't. I just hope they don't decide to pay me less because then they can pay the agency less. :P (The agency is supposed to get 25% of my starting annual salary.)

But I think I will take it, because it's something secure that I can do while I figure out whether my next step is grad school or an airline.

on 30 Jul 2004 09:03 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] rufinia.livejournal.com
It's, in theory, unlikely that you'll get paid less as a permanent hire than as a temp... you may be getting $13 an hour, but they're paying your agency probably closer to $20 an hour for you.

As for them trying to get around paying the temp agency to hire you, you should stay out of it completely. It's between the hospital and the agency, and is part of the agreement the hospital agreed to when they hired you.

on 30 Jul 2004 09:52 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] learnedax.livejournal.com
Yes and no. From the hiring company's standpoint, paying for short-term contractors always costs a significant premium, which generally equates to roughly the agency's cut. There is also a further trade off in that benefits increase your cost to the company, and thus they may decrease your hourly rate to compensate for that. But probably not by too much.

on 30 Jul 2004 10:40 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] snarkyman.livejournal.com
Congrats on the job! I hope they really come through for you. I suspect they may change your rate to $9.95/hour plus benefits.

Good Luck!

on 30 Jul 2004 10:49 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] juldea.livejournal.com
*nods* to the first half, I hadn't thought that through yet. If they paid me $13 they'd actually be paying less, now! :)

As to the second, yes, I wasn't going to stick my nose in it. That's theirs to deal with.

on 30 Jul 2004 10:50 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] juldea.livejournal.com
Why do you guess $9.95 specifically?

on 30 Jul 2004 11:38 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] snarkyman.livejournal.com
Call it a hunch - $9.95 is close to $10, without actually being $10. Believe it or not, this actually means something to the bean counters.

on 30 Jul 2004 12:53 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] juldea.livejournal.com
Which is important to the bean counters - the fact that it's close-but-not-quite to a dollar amount, or to specifically $10?

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 21 January 2026 11:41
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios