In his 2008 book The big squeeze, Steven Greenhouse devotes his chapter 7 to the situation of the "temps', temporary workers who very often are "permatemps", meaning they are not really temporary workers, just classified as such to be deprived of any benefit. Greenhouse mentions Microsoft several times. Here is the end of this chapter (page 134):
"Microsoft overhauled its policies as a result of the dispute. But even when Microsoft ordered its temp agencies to improve their health and vacation benefits and 401(k) offerings, the benefits they offered remained far worse than what Microsoft offered its regular employees".
Interestingly while detailing how permatemps were treated by Hewlett Packard's contractors in Boise, Greenhouse notices: "when Manpower was paying its permatemps $29 per hour, HP was paying Manpower more than $46 an hour for their services" (page 134).
So Manpower could have provided benefits and still make a sizable profit. What is the situation today at Microsoft? What mark up do the suppliers extract?
Interestingly while detailing how permatemps were treated by Hewlett Packard's contractors in Boise, Greenhouse notices: "when Manpower was paying its permatemps $29 per hour, HP was paying Manpower more than $46 an hour for their services" (page 134).
So Manpower could have provided benefits and still make a sizable profit. What is the situation today at Microsoft? What mark up do the suppliers extract?
Comments