Facebook contractors and subcontractors will not receive $1000 bonus
twitter.com
twitter.com
What a stupid thing to complain about.
> “Would help ease the cost of not having hot food and snacks at work five days a week also.”
There's also this article (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-13/facebook-...) which implies the minimum wage for their contractors is $18/hr in low cost areas and $22/hr in high cost areas.
I am a .NET contractor/consultant at a similarly large corporation (just finishing a contract now). I wouldn't expect a penny from the corporation. It just how it goes.
Agree
That would be inequity
FB pays its engineers more than other companies around the world. Is that inequity?
Should they? I'm a contractor. I realize the pros and cons of my choices.
However, contractor status is often also used as a way to bypass minimum-wage laws for cleaners, moderators and suchlike. People in this position might not be prepared to weather the storm; and some people are sympathetic to their plight.
Subcontractors are employees of someone else, so it’s that companies responsibility.
What I have experienced, first hand, is working as a contractor for large corporations.
I think some people are having a hard time seeing any downside to this arrangement.
One distinction in contracting is if you receive a 1099 or W-2 at the end of the year. For the employer, the 1099-contractor is an attractive position. You don't have to pay payroll taxes. They're (sometimes) not included in your workmans comp and (in some circumstances) liability insurance. They're not eligible for unemployment, and therefore your UI rate is lower.
Why would you hire someone as a 1099 contractor? Maybe your department has a new project and need someone who is an expert in, IDK, 'spaghetti code'. No one knows it, so the contractor works self-directed, from home, on their own machine. I knew a guy who was a contractor for banks and setup ATMs--very specialized knowledge.
Here's the first problem. "Looks like a duck. Walks like a duck. It's a duck." What happens when that contractor sits in your office right next to you. Does the same work. Is managed by the same manager. Working indefinitely. But, they're paid by a third-party. They don't get benefits. They're guaranteed to be the first people to be laid-off.
Compare this person to any-other worker in the market, there may be very few differences. They're still 'hired' by the third-party (and get a W-2), so they're eligible for unemployment. But compare them to the 'employees' they work with, and there may be a lot differences--such as this $1k free money at Facebook.
When the market is saturated with these sub-contracting jobs, it's a fraught choice. Work at 'Facebook' as a contractor, and start earning money, versus, what? keep looking? take a job at an unknown corporation? If you're young and inexperienced, and all of the points above sound new and unknown, you could ask yourself what's the difference?
The difference is qualitative one for the employee (No $1k bonus, and you're laid off), but a lot of small and marginal quantitative benefits for the employer.
There are a lot of other issues here. The rise of contracting and sub-contracting was a major change in the employment landscape when it started appearing 30 yrs ago. I think it's similar to the move from pensions to 401k.