Thread regarding Chesapeake Energy Corp. layoffs

Confused

Why do companies keep contractors on and fire employees that actually work for Cheaapeake? I'm not in the business but I've always wondered this.

by
| 849 views | | 16 replies (last October 2, 2015) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+DJhgLOe

16 replies (most recent on top)

Only a select few got to stay. Either good at what they do or another easy lay.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2jAk+DJhgLOe

Chesapeake actually let most (if not all) contractors go a few weeks ago

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @DOS+DJhgLOe

@591 - agreed and what's great about being a contractor is if you find yourself suddenly working for a jerk or on a boring project or on a project that's mired in political gamesmanship or the employees want you to lie to cover their f ups or any number of other reasons - you can bounce with just a tad bit of notice. Like one fing day. It's seriously the way to go for most people that get shit done. If you're a brown noser and/or don't actually do any work, employment is the way for you.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2iR+DJhgLOe

I am a said contractor and have worked with CHK for years now, I would never be an employee. Mainly for other reasons but yes we are less expensive and we actually are on the ground doing the work. Making us the indispensable in times like these... I have worked for the last 15 years while employees have come and gone or hopped one company to the next. Guys who have the experience don't be afraid to call a brokerage and get out there as an independent. Because the employee part of this industry is going bye bye for the next 3-5 years. I know a lot of people want to stay in the field and this is a way to be responsible for your own bottom line.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @RCv+DJhgLOe

Affordable Care Act will see to it companies don't get away with not offering benefits to contractors very soon. May not be cheaper when their benefit burden is almost the same as an employee. CHK has a ton of contractors that should actually be employees.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gXY+DJhgLOe

Employees are in meetings, discussing initiatives and spelling out all things that may go wrong. Contractors are disposable,they keep their mouth shout, and work. So Contractors do all the work which employees do not have time to tackle (as they are in meetings). Makes sense?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @t87+DJhgLOe

Contractors make more, however they get no benefits. Wash out is you don't count the worthless stock. Contractors can get cut any day at any given time.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @0Xl+DJhgLOe

Economics 101, dumbass

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @S4o+DJhgLOe

Contractors = NO SEVERANCE. Duh!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sCz+DJhgLOe

on average, an employee costs the company 3-5 times his gross income.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4o6+DJhgLOe

No benefits to pay! It is a no brainer.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uYL+DJhgLOe

Contractors are cheaper. You don't have to pay anything for their health care, 401k benefits, etc and you can whack them with short/no notice.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @YuF+DJhgLOe

Contractors are Not cheaper!!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6pa+DJhgLOe

Thanks. I had a feeling that was going to be the answer.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1PC+DJhgLOe

Less administration, easy scalability, sometimes can be used for favorable tax treatment, no federal employment law BS.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zmh+DJhgLOe

Contractors are much, much cheaper.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @KFU+DJhgLOe

Post a reply

: