Re:The Pop-Up Employer: Build a Team, Do the Job, Say Goodbye
by TranquilMarmot on Thursday July 13, 2017 @05:19PM
(#14765346)
I think that was their point; with healthcare tied to the employer, going to a pop-up employer is way riskier since it means you'll not only be gambling on your economic stability once the project is done, but the ability for you to get healthcare.
Re:The Pop-Up Employer: Build a Team, Do the Job, Say Goodbye
by wolfgke on Friday July 14, 2017 @04:28AM
(#14768386)
> I think that was their point; with healthcare tied to the employer, going to a pop-up employer is way riskier since it means you'll not only be gambling on your economic stability once the project is done, but the ability for you to get healthcare.
Which is exactly, as a pointed out, an argument against the fact that health care is tied to the employer, but not against the pop-up employer per se.
Re:The Pop-Up Employer: Build a Team, Do the Job, Say Goodbye
by nnnnnande on Friday July 14, 2017 @07:28AM
(#14768983)
Yes, but it's a technicality. For all intents and purposes it is an argument against pop-up employers if that form of employment means having worse health care coverage, or none at all (I'm not based in the US, so not entirely sure how it works). Ensuring the same health care coverage invalidates the argument, but that's not today's reality as I understood it.
This is rather an argument against the fact that health care is tied to the employer (which I agree it should not) and not against the pop-up employer.