|
Contract Employee's Newsletter
Helping Contract Professionals
Manage Their Careers
September 15, 2001
Edited by James R. Ziegler
A Companion to:
The Contract
Employee's Handbook
www.cehandbook.com
Sponsored by:
P.A.C.E. - Professional
Association for Contract Employment
www.pacepros.com
About The Contract Employee's Newsletter
The Contract Employee's Newsletter is a free e-mail publication
for technical and professional contractors containing news, commentary,
tips, links to useful resources, nuggets of wisdom submitted by
readers, and anything else that seems appropriate at the time. The
CENewsletter is distributed bimonthly or whenever issues warrant.
The subscriber list is confidential and will not be disclosed outside
this organization.
In This Issue
Read the previous
issue of The Contract Employee's Newsletter.
Suggest A
Topic For The Newsletter
Mail your suggestions to suggestion@pacepros.com.
News and Views
Tempnapping And Agency Jumping Are Now Legal In
New Hampshire
When one agency "steals" a temp from another agency it
is called "tempnapping". When a temp changes from one
employer of record to another it is called "agency jumping".
In either case, the first agency is likely to sue the other one
for tortious interference with a contractual relationship. A recent
New Hampshire Supreme Court ruling makes tempnapping and agency
jumping legal in that state. The ruling is good news for Contract
Professionals, and it portends a profound change in the way recruiting
firms will do business.
Temporary employees of staffing agencies are regular employees,
and they are entitled to the same rights and privileges enjoyed
by the employees of all companies, among which is the right to quit
at will and go to work for the "competition" or any other
company that offers a better working environment, a higher wage,
and a superior benefits package.
Certainly, staffing agencies spend a lot of time and money recruiting
temporary employees, and these agencies do not want to see their
"investments" jump to another employer for a better deal,
especially if that better deal is offered by a competing agency
at the same client. But this holds for every employer, not just
for staffing agencies. On August 15, 2001 the New Hampshire Supreme
Court affirmed the right of staffing agency employees in New Hampshire
to change their employer of record while continuing to work at the
same client.
The Supreme
Court decision is posted on the Web. In the following paragraphs
I outline the logic behind the court's decision, using edited and
direct excerpts from the public record.
In the original suit, the plaintiff, National Employment Service
Corporation (National), alleged that the defendant, Olsten Staffing
Service, Inc. (Olsten), violated a restrictive covenant (noncompete
clause) in an employment contract between National and its temporary
employees, and intentionally interfered with National's contractual
relationship with its employees. Essentially, National sued Olsten
for "Tempnapping," or tortious interference with a contractual
relationship by hiring away National's temporary employees who continued
working at the same client.
Covenants Not To Compete Are Unreasonable and Unenforceable
In supporting their position, Olsten first argues that the restrictive
covenant in National's contracts with its employees is unreasonable
and unenforceable.
"The public policy of New Hampshire encourages free trade
and discourages covenants not to compete. Nevertheless, our courts
uphold a limited restraint if reasonable as applied to the particular
circumstances of the parties. A restraint on employment is reasonable
only if it is no greater than necessary for the protection of
the employer's legitimate interest, does not impose undue hardship
on the employee, and is not injurious to the public interest."
Citing case law, Olsten asserts that:
"If a covenant violates any prong of the reasonableness
test, it is unreasonable and unenforceable."
And furthermore:
"Covenants are valid only to the extent that they prevent
employees from appropriating assets that are legitimately the
employer's."
"Legitimate interests of an employer which may be protected
from competition include: the employer's trade secrets which have
been communicated to the employee during the course of employment;
confidential information communicated by the employer to the employee,
but not involving trade secrets, such as information on a unique
business method; an employee's special influence over the employer's
customers, obtained during the course of employment; contacts
developed during the employment; and the employer business's development
of goodwill and a positive image."
Based on this reasoning the court then finds:
"In this case, the sole "employer interest" articulated
by National is the retention of employees for a sufficient period
[90 days] to enable it to recoup costs associated with "recruiting,
interviewing, checking references, qualifying, insuring, and placing"
its employees. All businesses, however, incur expenses in recruiting
and hiring employees. National does not allege that the restrictive
covenant was necessary to prevent its employees from appropriating
the company's confidential information, trade secrets, or goodwill.
Its employees were light industrial laborers who were not in a
position to appropriate the company's goodwill and were without
access to sensitive information. Post-employment restrictions
on such employees would be contrary to public policy and would
impose an undue hardship, particularly for at-will employees who
could be discharged at any time.
Thus, we hold that although there may be valid reasons to restrictive
covenants, the mere cost associated with recruiting and hiring
employees is not a legitimate interest protectable by a restrictive
covenant in an employment contract. Because National has not met
the first prong of the reasonableness test, the covenant is unreasonable
and unenforceable."
No Tortious Interference
Next, Olsten argues that it was within its rights to offer employment
to the employees of a competing agency, and, therefore, its recruiting
of National's temporary employees at the same client was not tortious
interference.
Citing additional case law the court noted that a competitor
"may offer better contract terms, as by offering an [at-will]
employee of the plaintiff more money to work for him . . . and
he may make use of persuasion or other suitable means, all without
liability."
And
"Everyone has a right to offer better terms to another's
employees so long as the latter is free to leave, and in inducing
such an employee to quit his employment or in persuading him to
enter his own employment, a third party acts within his legal
rights and interferes with no contract relation in the sense here
intended."
Thus the New Hampshire Supreme Court finds:
"We hold that the mere fact that a competitor induces an
at-will employee to leave his employer and work for that competitor
does not in and of itself constitute interference with contractual
relations. The employer must demonstrate an improper purpose,
beyond lawful competition, on the part of the competitor or the
employee."
Again, quoting case law, the New Hampshire Supreme court concludes:
"It is unreasonable to restrict a[] [non-professional] employee
to his current employer when he could do better elsewhere, especially
when that employee could be discharged at will and without recourse."
Far Reaching Consequences
By this ruling, it would appear that the New Hampshire Supreme
Court has struck down the validity of staffing agency noncompete
clauses in that state. Tempnapping and agency jumping are now legal
in New Hampshire. National required its light industrial temps to
sign a noncompete clause with a duration of only 90 days. Yet, virtually
all recruiting firms that employ contract employees impose noncompete
clauses with durations as long as six months to one year. Surely,
the gate is now open wide for every agency contractor in New Hampshire
to jump to another agency at will with no consequence to either
the contractor or the new agency.
By this ruling also, the Supreme Court has established a competitive
environment in which staffing agencies will be compelled to compete
for employees by offering better working conditions, higher wages,
and superior benefits. Agencies that fail to compete for employees
along these dimensions will fail to survive.
I see yet another, more profound, consequence of this ruling. The
Supreme Court decision drives a wedge between the two distinct functions
of "job placement" and "employer of record."
It is the tieing of these two separate functions, facilitated by
abusive noncompete clauses and a universal code of silence regarding
the disclosure of billing rates, that has allowed predatory recruiting
firms to profit from obscenely high margins and low pay rates. From
now on, agencies will have to specialize in either one function
or the other. They will no longer be able to compete simultaneously
in both arenas.
On the one hand there will be agencies that only place contractors
with clients. These agencies will be of two sorts: 1) Recruiters
who charge a fee to the client to fulfill candidate search assignments,
and 2) marketing agents who charge a fee to the contractor to fulfill
project search assignments. Neither recruiters nor marketing agents
will actually employ the contractor. Instead, contractors will be
free to contract directly with the client or through an employer
of record of the contractor's choice.
On the other hand there will be employers of record who will employ
contractors for the purpose of mitigating the risks associated with
co-employment and noncompliance with common law factors, and to
provide contractors with back-office services and a superior benefits
package. Employers of record will not place contractors. They will
only employ them.
Firms that provide both functions simply will be unable to compete
with the specialists. The New Hampshire ruling paves the way for
contractors who were placed at a client by a "typical"
recruiting firm to jump to a progressive employer of record like
P.A.C.E.
that operates on a very low margin and offers the best benefits
package available to any employee in any company in the USA. This
far reaching ruling by the New Hampshire Supreme Court is the beginning
of the end for contractor recruiting firms as we have known them.
Judicial rulings in one state frequently provide precedents for
judicial rulings and legislation in other states. Thus, this one
Supreme Court ruling in just one state may be the splinter in the
heel of the evil giant that brings the entire recruiting industry
to submission in every state of the Union. These two agencies, National
and Olsten, in fighting a seemingly inconsequential skirmish that
went all the way to the New Hampshire Supreme Court may have ultimately
lost the war for them both.
Contract Professionals in the state of New Hampshire are now free
to change their employer of record at will. Naturally, I am highly
biased, but I hope they will change their employer of record to
P.A.C.E.
Return to Table of Contents.
Kudos and Testimonials
JobHuntersBible.com
What Color Is Your Parachute? A Practical Manual
for Job-Hunters and Career-Changers
 "This
[The Contract Employee's Handbook] is an immensely useful handbook,
covering every facet of doing temporary or contract work. The site
also has a contract employee's newsletter. It's sponsored by the
Professional Association for Contract Employment."
What Color Is Your Parachute is the best-selling job-hunting book
in the world. Twenty thousand people buy the book each month, and
there are more than 6 million copies in print. JobHuntersBible.com
is the online presence of What Color Is Your Parachute? We are extremely
proud that The Contract Employee's Handbook has been selected as
a "Parachute Pick", their highest rating.
Return to Table of Contents.
Marketing Tips
Preformatted Job Board Links
I learned this trick from my friend, Keith Halperin. Keith is a
contract recruiter in the San Francisco Bay Area. Contract recruiters
are contractors who work for corporate HR departments. They usually
bill their clients by the hour just like other contract professionals.
Chances are, when you send your resume to jobs@CompanyName.com you
will be contacted by a contract recruiter. Folks, these are the
good guys. They have nothing in common with the predatory outside
recruiting firms that skim thousands of dollars off the billing
rate and force you to become their W-2 employee in order to take
a contract assignment.
A preformatted job board link is the URL that appears at the top
of the results page when you search online for jobs and contract
assignments. Preformatted job board links can save you a lot of
time during online job searches. You can use the same link over
and over on subsequent searches.
You can create a preformatted job board link for each of your favorite
job boards. First, carry out your job search in the usual way. Then,
copy the resulting URL into a list of preformatted URLs in an e-mail
message that you keep on hand for future searches. That way, every
time you have to look for a new contract assignment you just open
the e-mail and click on the active links.
Here is a preformatted job board link from FlipDog.com for <Oracle
DBA> positions in the San Francisco area. In this search I unchecked
the box: "Show recruiter & staffing agency listings".
http://www.flipdog.com/js/jobsearch-results.html?loc=CA-San+Francisco+Area&srch=oracle+dba&jobType=nonRecruiter&job=1
The search returned lots of jobs. Almost all of the jobs were posted
by companies themselves.
I also searched using the keywords <recruiter or "human
resources">. I selected "California" and "San
Francisco Area", and the Job Category "Human Resources".
Again I unchecked the box: "Show recruiter & staffing agency
listings". This search also returned a goodly number of matches.
Click on the preformatted job board link to see the search results
for Recruiting and HR positions in the San Francisco Area.
http://www.flipdog.com/js/jobsearch-results.html?loc=CA-San+Francisco+Area&cat=Human+Resources
&srch=recruiter+or+%22human+resources%22&jobType=nonRecruiter&job=1
Revisit your list of preformatted job board links daily to check
for fresh posts.
FlipDog.com claims to be the single largest employment search engine
on the Web. FlipDog indexes jobs that are posted directly on corporate
career pages. As you might expect, most of the jobs are full-time
positions.
When you encounter a full-time job, just divide the upper value
of the salary range by 1000. This gives an estimate of the equivalent
hourly billing rate based on the fully-loaded labor cost. With this
information you can go after jobs on a contract-to-hire basis. Once
on board with a company, you can stay on contract indefinitely.
Read about the divide-by-1000 rule of thumb in the article called
Setting
Your Rates.
It is highly beneficial financially that you work as a contractor
rather than a full-time regular employee. However, if you land a
contract assignment through a recruiting firm, or if you take a
contract-to-hire (temp-to-perm) position through an agency, you
will necessarily earn much less than a full-time regular
employee with similar skills.
The rationale for this conclusion is discussed in the white paper
Someone
Else's Employee.
The Contract Employee's Handbook has a list of "contractor-friendly"
job boards in Appendix
A: Resources for Contract Workers.
Start with these "contractor-friendly" job boards to
create your personal list of preformatted job board links customized
to your specific skill set and geographic requirements.
Preformatted job board links don't always work all the time, but
they work often enough.
Again, my thanks to Keith Halperin for turning me on to this nifty
trick.
Share Your Proven Marketing Tips
Do you have a marketing tip that works well for you? May we share
it with the Contract Professionals who read The Contract Employee's
Newsletter? Send your proven marketing tips to suggestion@pacepros.com.
Return to Table of Contents.
Resources
NAPSTRACK Legislative Quarterly Report
Founded in 1961, the National Association of Personnel Services
(NAPS)
is the oldest association of its kind. NAPS represents 1800 staffing
firms throughout the United States in contingency and retained search,
direct hire, temporary staffing, employee leasing, and contract
employment. Services to member firms include education and certification
of staffing professionals and lobbying on behalf of the staffing
industry.
NAPS, itself, is of no particular interest to highly compensated
Contract Professionals. For one thing, the association represents
member firms that universally view the client as their only customer.
In other words, NAPS operates on the "wrong" side of the
fence. Second, NAPS members deal mostly with lower paid clerical
and light industrial workers.
Nevertheless, the NAPS website has one feature, NAPSTRACK,
that should be of interest to every Contract Professional that uses
recruiting firms to land contract assignments. The NAPSTRACK page
reports quarterly updates on the status of legislative and court
actions affecting the personnel services and staffing industry.
Below are some excerpts from the NAPSTRACK page dated June 2001.
It is apparent from the court cases and pending legislation that
states are moving, if only slowly, in the general direction of requiring
full disclosure of billing rates, letting contractors seek higher
wages and better benefits at the same client through a competing
agency, and requiring that agencies offer minimal benefits to their
temporary employees. This is good news for Contract Professionals
who find work through recruiting firms.
CONNECTICUT
Pending Legislation
BILL NO.: H6629
SUMMARY: Requires staffing firm to pay temps wages no less
than that of client's employees, and provide them with health insurance.
Prohibits charging client a fee for hiring a temp.
STATUS: Labor and Public Employees Committee
BILL NO.: H5218
SUMMARY: Exempts computer workers who make at least $27.63
per hour from state overtime pay requirements.
STATUS: No action likely on this bill.
MARYLAND
Recent Litigation
CASE: Quality Systems v. Warman
COURT: Federal District Court, District of Maryland
SUMMARY: Court would not issue injunction against former
employees of staffing firm who left as a group to work for competitor,
since the only evidence as to their activities following termination
was that they acted in unison. There was no evidence of utilizing
trade secrets of plaintiff's.
MASSACHUSETTS
BILL NO.: S64
SUMMARY: Requires staffing firms to provide temps with wages
and benefits equal to that of the client's employees. Repeals the
exemption of temporary service firms from employment agency licensing
law.
STATUS: Joint Commerce and Labor Committee.
BILL NO.: S131
SUMMARY: Requires staffing firms disclose to temps the rates
they charge to the client.
STATUS: Joint Commerce and Labor Committee.
MICHIGAN
Recent Litigation
CASE: Sands Appliance Services v. Wilson
COURT: State Supreme Court
SUMMARY: Court invalidated an employment contract in which
an employee agreed to reimburse employer $50 per week for job training
obtained on the job by employee, if employee could not stay employed
for at least six years. This contract was deemed to violate a Michigan
statute which states, "An employer... shall not demand or receive,
directly or indirectly from an employee, a fee, gift, tip, gratuity,
or other remuneration or consideration, as a condition of employment
or continuation of employment."
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Recent Litigation
CASE: National Employment Service Corporation v. Olsten Staffing
Services
COURT: State Supreme Court
SUMMARY: Staffing firm's contracts with temps, which contained
restrictive covenants prohibiting them from accepting employment
at the client company for 90 days subsequent to termination, violated
public policy and was unenforceable because the staffing firm had
no protectable interest in restricting competition by employees
who did not have access to trade secrets or confidential information,
or have the ability to take advantage of client good will. Additionally,
Court ruled for defendant in tempnapping case, holding that interference
with at will employment relationship between staffing firm and its
at will employees was not wrongful.
OREGON
Pending Legislation
BILL NO.: H2313
SUMMARY: Requires staffing firm to disclose to candidate
upon request all fee agreements between it and the client.
STATUS: House Business Labor and Consumer Affairs Committee.
BILL NO.: S687
SUMMARY: Establishes task force to study increasing use of
temporary employees who do not receive benefits.
STATUS: Ways and Means Committee.
PENNSYLVANIA
Recent Litigation
CASE: Robert Half International v. Gregory J. Stenz
COURT: Federal District Court, Eastern District
SUMMARY: Applying Delaware law, as specified in the contract
between the parties, Court found that former employer of staffing
manager for Accountemps office could not enforce clause in employment
agreement which prohibited former employee from working for competing
staffing firm, but could enforce clause prohibiting solicitation
of former employer's clients or employees.
WASHINGTON
BILL NO.: S5033
SUMMARY: Requires staffing firm and clients to allow temps
to inspect their personnel files.
STATUS: Bill passed Committee.
BILL NO.: S5259
SUMMARY: Requires disclosures by staffing firms to temps,
including the bill rate.
STATUS: No further action likely this year. Will carry over
to next year.
Return to Table of Contents.
P.A.C.E. News
Schwab Personal Choice Retirement Plan
P.A.C.E.
gives its contract employees the best retirement savings plan available
to ANY employee in ANY company in the USA.
The P.A.C.E. 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan is an extremely aggressive,
100% self-directed, retirement savings program designed for highly
compensated employees. It is unexcelled by any employer of record
service in the country. You may contribute pretax dollars equal
to 25% of gross earnings up to $32,600 per year into a Charles Schwab
Personal Choice Retirement Savings account. There is no waiting
period to qualify, and contributions are immediately vested.
You have the freedom to customize your retirement portfolio by
investing in any and all publicly traded stocks, bonds, and mutual
funds, of which 1100 are no load and have no transaction fee. As
a P.A.C.E. Contractor you have virtually the same investment options
as a retail brokerage client of Charles
Schwab & Co. No other retirement account offers a greater
choice of tax-deferred investment options.
As a P.A.C.E. Division Manager you may access your retirement account
through a dedicated Internet site where you can change your funds
allocation and check the status of your investments at any time.
Each month, and each time you change your funds allocation, Schwab
issues a comprehensive hard-copy report on the status of your account.
Needless to say, we are very excited about offering this program
to P.A.C.E. Division Managers.
P.A.C.E. is a Win - Win - Win - Win Solution for Downsized Employees,
Contract Employees, Independent Contractors, and Client Companies.
Check out P.A.C.E.
for the best benefits package available to ANY employee in ANY company
in the USA.
Return to Table of Contents.
Contract Employee's
Handbook
Appendix A: Resources For Contract Workers
Appendix
A of The
Contract Employee's Handbook contains almost 90 pages of annotated
links of resources and web sites for Contract Professionals, yet
it barely scratches the surface. Fortunately, the listed web sites
have links, and the linked-to web sites have links, which in turn
lead to more links, etc., etc. Given the incredible interconnectivity
of the Web, just a little data mining will drill down and through
to almost any resource you need.
The sheer abundance of information can be overwhelming. Example
#1: The Internet has over 30,000 job boards. Where do you possibly
start?
Example #2: Simply entering the keywords <contract employees>
at Google.com
returns 1.5 million web pages. (Happily, the Contract Employee's
Handbook and P.A.C.E. are both listed at the very top of the list!)
How can you find what you want in so much information?
Appendix A is a start. When you do search the Internet, use additional
keywords to narrow down your search. When you find a web site that
you like, scan it for descriptive words. Then include those words
in your string of keywords when searching for new sites. When looking
for job boards enter terms such as <northern california>,
<bay area>, <silicon valley>, <94520> to retrieve
job boards with regional listings. Enter additional keywords that
describe your specific skill set to retrieve a more focused list.
For example, using the text string <jobs "San Francisco"
Cobol Java> will locate jobs and projects in the San Francisco
area for the web enabling of Cobol systems.
My favorite search engine is Google.com,
but you can find links to literally hundreds of search engines and
directories in Appendix A under the heading "Search Engines
and Tools." You will also find links to hundreds of newspaper
classifieds and magazine indexes under the heading "Newspaper
Classifieds and Magazine Indexes."
Appendix A is growing rapidly, and with the addition of new resources
and headings this PDF document will soon number well over 100 pages.
Click on the headings in the Bookmarks column to travel quickly
to specific sections. For more general searches within Appendix
A select the "Binoculars" icon in the menu bar and enter
your keyword in the "Find What" window.
Do you have a favorite resource that is not yet listed in Appendix
A? Send your recommendations to Resources@pacepros.com.
Return to Table of Contents.
Contract Employee's
Glossary
Terminology For Contract Professionals
This issue focuses on terms relating to the legal status of independent
contractors.
1706
In 1978 Congress passed a revenue act that established that employers
could appeal reclassification of independent contractors by the
IRS if the employer’s industry had consistently treated certain
classes of workers as independent contractors. These provisions
are spelled out in Section 530 of the revenue act.
Section 1706 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 amended the Revenue
Act of 1978 by adding a new subsection (d) to Section 530. Subsection
530(d) provides that employers threatened with IRS reclassification
can no longer seek safe harbor relief for certain job classifications
in which the worker is represented by a third-party agency. For
some arcane reason Congress singled out for exclusion from safe
harbor protection only individuals who provide services “as
an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst,
or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.”
Almost overnight, thousands of independent contractors found it
necessary to convert from 1099 status to W-2 status as client companies
grew increasingly fearful of IRS audits that might reclassify independent
contractors as employees of the client.
The overriding impact of Section 1706 is that it precipitated a
mass hysteria among corporate HR departments as the IRS began to
reclassify technical contractors working through third-party agencies.
The IRS became more aggressive, and employers began to discriminate
against all independent contractors, even true consultants and one-person
corporations. Thus, Section 1706 fueled the rise in popularity of
scaled-up temp agencies, and thereby caused untold thousands of
contractors to lose control over their contracting careers.
Common law
Common law is the body of law developed in England primarily from
judicial decisions based on custom and precedent, unwritten in statute
or code, and constituting the basis of the English legal system
and of the system in all of the U.S. except Louisiana. Essentially,
common law is law that comes from common practice, as opposed to
legislation.
Common law factors.
Common law factors are guidelines drawn from past experience.
For example, the IRS and many state and federal agencies have issued
lists of common law factors that in the aggregate discriminate between
employees and independent contractors. The IRS once published a
list of 20 common law factors, known popularly as “the twenty
questions.” The list has been shortened and modified somewhat
in the 1996 IRS training manual called Independent
Contractor or Employee. The training manual identifies 11 common
law factors in three areas of “control.” The courts have
cited at least 57 common law factors over the years in determining
worker status.
Independent contractor
The IRS recognizes two types of worker status for tax collection
purposes: employee and independent contractor. An independent contractor
is any worker or entity for hire that is not an employee. Independent
contractors may be sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability
companies, or corporations. Most technical and professional consultants
are either sole proprietorships or one-person corporations. These
are the two business forms that we usually associate with individuals
who operate as independent contractors. There is some disagreement
about the precise definition of an independent contractor. Some
authors restrict the term to individuals working as an independent
business. Others include all businesses ranging in size from a one-person
operation to the largest mega-corporation.
IRS Form SS-8
This form is titled "Determination
of Worker Status for Purposes of Federal Employment Taxes and Income
Tax Withholding". You can ask the IRS to make a determination
as to whether an employer-employee relationship exists by filing
Form SS-8. If the IRS finds that an employer has incorrectly treated
you as an independent contractor the employer may be liable for
the social security and Medicare tax withholding that the employer
failed to withhold and pay.
IRS Form W-9
This form is titled "Request
for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification".
Independent contractors are required to give their clients a valid
tax identification number (TIN) at the beginning of the client-vendor
relationship. IRS Form W-9 is used for this purpose. Sole proprietors
may submit their Social Security number or a Federal Employer Identification
Number (FEIN) if they have one. All other independent contractors
must submit a valid FEIN. If an independent contractor fails to
provide a valid TIN, the client is required to withhold 31% of what
they owe the contractor as an assessment for income taxes. This
assessment is called backup withholding. In practice a client company
should never engage the services of an independent contractor, or
any other vendor for that matter, without first obtaining the vendor’s
TIN.
Return to Table of Contents.
Contract Employee's
Workshop
Have LCD Projector, Will Travel
I am developing an all-day Saturday Workshop for technical and
professional contractors. I call it The Contract Employee's Workshop.
(How original!)
During the initial shakedown period I will offer the workshop in
the San Francisco Bay Area. Cost of admission will be in the neighborhood
of $50, provided I can locate an inexpensive yet comfortable venue
large enough to hold at least 50 people. It would be nice to have
a corporate sponsor for the workshop, especially if I don't have
to sell my soul (and halo) to qualify for their support. Ideas anyone?
Participants will leave the workshop with a solid understanding
of how this crazy contracting industry works. Agency contractors
will learn how to increase their earnings by 30% to 50% on their
very next contract assignment. The handouts alone are worth the
cost of admission.
After the initial shakedown I'll take the workshop on the road
to those cities across the US that express the greatest interest
in The Contract Employee's Workshop.
I'm open to suggestions. E-mail your ideas and suggestions to Workshop@pacepros.com
Return to Table of Contents.
The Contract Employee's
Project
The Contract Employee's Project is the larger context under which
the following interrelated vehicles operate to promote and defend
the interests of Contract Professionals:
Copyright and
Publication Info
Copyright (c) 2001, James R. Ziegler. All rights reserved.
You may copy or forward this free publication provided it is left
intact with all links and this notice unchanged. Any unauthorized
duplication, including republication in part or in full for commercial
use, is an infringement of copyright.
Published by:
P.A.C.E. - Professional Association for Contract Employment
1355 Willow Way, Suite 244
Concord, CA 94520
U.S.A.
http://www.pacepros.com/
Editor:
James R. Ziegler, Ph.D.
Executive Director
P.A.C.E. -- Professional Association for Contract Employment
(925) 680-0200
ziegler@pacepros.com
Return to Table of Contents.
Disclaimer
The Contract Employee's Newsletter is designed to provide information
in regard to the subject matter covered. Use is granted with the
understanding that the publisher and authors are not engaged in
rendering legal or financial advice. If expert assistance is required
you should seek the services of a competent professional.
The purpose of this information is to educate and entertain. The
publisher and contributors shall have neither liability nor responsibility
to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused,
or alleged to be caused, directly or indirectly, by the information
contained in this Newsletter or by information contained in any
web site or resource referenced by citation or hypertext link within
the pages of this Newsletter.
Return to Table of Contents.
Subscribe to The Contract
Employee's Newsletter
The Contract Employee's
Newsletter: Sign Up Now! Useful News & Updates
Return to Table of Contents.
Sign-off
I hope you have found the information in this newsletter to be
interesting, informative, and provocative. I encourage you to share
the CENewsletter with your friends, colleagues, coworkers, clients,
and agency recruiters.
Why clients? Because you need every ally you can get. Why agency
recruiters? Because they need to know the jig is up.
Wishing you success in your contracting career,
James R. Ziegler, Ph.D.
Executive Director
P.A.C.E. -- Professional Association for Contract Employment
Return to Table of Contents.
>>> Return
to the P.A.C.E. Home Page
|
