[Gwynn ap Nudd]

Maybe my googlefu is lacking, or thier restrictions on search content are hurting me, but I have been looking for a list of companies that generally do not hire full time employees. I haven't found one and was hoping people here could chime in with experiences they have had, links to related articles, etc.

Walmart is the poster child for this, and it has been well documented that they prefer not to hire full time employees. A second name I would add to the list is London Drugs. Through anecdotal evidence from a few people I know who have worked there, this is another company that would rather hire more part-timers than give full time hours.

Oh, and the reasons for asking and why I posted in this forum. I can afford to pay the ~1% more it costs to shop somewhere that does give full time hours (inclusive with benifits, stat holidays etc.) and think that this practice is a reprehensible. I won't shop at any store that I know does this. I would not be surprised if others had different views.

[Gnaw]

Gwynn ap Nudd, on 01 September 2014 - 02:48 AM, said:

Maybe my googlefu is lacking, or thier restrictions on search content are hurting me, but I have been looking for a list of companies that generally do not hire full time employees. I haven't found one and was hoping people here could chime in with experiences they have had, links to related articles, etc.

Walmart is the poster child for this, and it has been well documented that they prefer not to hire full time employees. A second name I would add to the list is London Drugs. Through anecdotal evidence from a few people I know who have worked there, this is another company that would rather hire more part-timers than give full time hours.

Oh, and the reasons for asking and why I posted in this forum. I can afford to pay the ~1% more it costs to shop somewhere that does give full time hours (inclusive with benifits, stat holidays etc.) and think that this practice is a reprehensible. I won't shop at any store that I know does this. I would not be surprised if others had different views.

Add most of the fast food chains to that list. Also I suspect most grocery stores, but that's just a guess.

Another issue that is, imho, at least as reprehensible is the number of manufacturing companies that use temp staffing. IBM was infamous for this. I knew two people who worked for them in their Boulder, Colorado facility for several years. 89 days at time. They'd be given both their "no longer needed" ticket and the staffing request at the same time. Both had clean room lockers with nameplates. They told me that ~half the crew were the same status.

[Morgoth]

I worked for an insurance company/bank out of Law School, and I'd Guess that 70 % of the people I worked with were temps (me included).

And Yeah, I think it's a worthwile endeavour to try to minimize the Money one provides these Companies.

[Tarthenal Theloman Toblakai]

sad to say, the care industry is shit for this too. Two of my aunties, my ex girlfriend, cousing and sister all worked for a company called CareUK and they did those horrible zero hour contracts. These poor girls (sometimes guys too) worked from 6am until 10pm, without proper breaks. Apparently travelling 10-15mins to the next house they visited was classed as a 'break' which is utter bullshit. The pay was also lousy, no sick pay either. As well as the physical abused they recieved from residents doing an already difficult job. I am sure there is more which sucks in the care industry, I just can't remember atm, but yea, part time or zero hour contracts are horrible. Fortunately I have never been at the rough end of one, but would definitely do the same and buoycot said stores.

[Morgoth]

Ah, even temps have stronger protections here. Our unions are rather less forgiving of that sort of stuff.

[Gwynn ap Nudd]

Shield Anvil of House our new tyrannical overlord whom we bow before, on 01 September 2014 - 04:18 AM, said:

Add most of the fast food chains to that list. Also I suspect most grocery stores, but that's just a guess.

Another issue that is, imho, at least as reprehensible is the number of manufacturing companies that use temp staffing. IBM was infamous for this. I knew two people who worked for them in their Boulder, Colorado facility for several years. 89 days at time. They'd be given both their "no longer needed" ticket and the staffing request at the same time. Both had clean room lockers with nameplates. They told me that ~half the crew were the same status.

I think you need to be careful lumping fast food chains together, as employee practices can be different between different franchises in the same chain. For centrally owned chains, this could be more applicable. As an example, there were a couple of small fast food franchises near where I used to work that were essentially run as family businesses. At the one I am more familiar with, the franchise owners (husband and wife) worked six days a week and most of the employees had full time hours.

Temp staffing is just as bad, when used in those situations.

[Gust Hubb]

I think the practice is fairly epidemic. Starbucks uses temps at its HQ (thought they hired me on after a year rather than dump me). There are numerous part timers at the hospital. etc. To try and ban use of those companies would probably result in your camping like a bump, digging through the garbage or hunting squirrels.

Walmart is evil.

[Illuyankas]

My last job (and current but I'll talk about that later) was working for the Royal Mail at an MDEC, a manual data entry centre where I was required to type thousands of post codes and town/city names an hour that the letter recognition software couldn't handle. They haven't hired full time employees for about five years. We were let go because we were the last group taken in, so despite being literally the most accurate team there we were the first out. Privatisation is just going to make it all a lot worse.

Current job is a part time telesales gig (not cold calling fortunately but the hours are all after my college hours so I can do both) through an agency but I might get offered a permanent placement if I make it for twelve weeks, so here's hoping!

[Gwynn ap Nudd]

Necromancer of High House our new tyrannical overlord whom we bow before, on 01 September 2014 - 07:13 PM, said:

I think the practice is fairly epidemic. Starbucks uses temps at its HQ (thought they hired me on after a year rather than dump me). There are numerous part timers at the hospital. etc. To try and ban use of those companies would probably result in your camping like a bump, digging through the garbage or hunting squirrels.

Walmart is evil.

I'm not sold that the practice is epidemic yet. My nephew, who was one of those who was unable to get full time hours working at London Drugs, quit because of this and was able to get full time hours working for a chain pizza place. He was also able to get full time hours at 7-11, with benifits, prior to working at London Drugs.

There are part timers everywhere I agree, but some of those are for positions that are only needed part time and/or with employees who only want to work part time. There is no way I would have gotten through Uni working full time, but the part time jobs I had certainly helped pay the rent.

There are still a few grocery stores and the like in Canada with union employees for example, you can bet they have full time employees. Apart from that, I find most smaller businesses give full time hours or are staffed by the owners who work more than full time. I'm not above asking, so I think the next time I am out grocery shopping etc. I'll just plain ask the cashier and see what they say.

[Mezla PigDog]

There's a difference between part time contracts and zero hours one; particularly zero hours contracts that prevent you from working elsewhere....ummm so I don't know how often you will want me but I can't work for someone else when you don't want me? Yes that's fair. I would boycott zero hours employers if I knew who they all were but I expect I wouldn't be able to buy or do anything in the UK if so.

Temporary contracts are becoming endemic now so the immorality of zero hours is just the extreme end of a broken system. In my field of high skilled science and engineering it used to be a case of working full time until in your 40s or 50s when you become highly experienced and highly sought after and go into contracting - you got paid shed loads and worked a few months on and a few off and really enjoyed life. The businesses you worked for benefited from being able to ramp staff numbers up and down as and when they had income for development projects while maintaining a minimum full time workforce. Now they hire people on temporary contracts from the outset and keep wages low by not providing job security. It is allegedly in response to the fact that UK employment law makes it too hard to sack ineffectual full time employees but that's bull - businesses full of weak employees is a sign of ineffectual managers!

The rights of workers in the UK are being severely eroded by creep in employment law and crackdown on unions. It stinks.

[Macros]

Unions in the UK are so ineffective its farcical, every company out there rubbed its hands in glee at the credit crunch and used it as an excuse to force thousands to go self employed where they lose all protections and benefits. No overtime rates nothing, and can be chopped with a days notice