>Right on Doyle,
>
>I'm not sure if this is a bias of urban centers but I don't think it's
true
>that the majority of temp workers are young, highly skilled, well
educated,
>and able to make $60-$70 dollars an hour. I agree with Doyle, these
people are
>NOT temps. There is a difference between temperary work and
subcontracting.
>
>Jason
>
I agree here too. There's a big difference income-wise between working in a warehouse moving boxes and counting Barbra Streisand and Korn T-shirts for $9/hr, and the subcontracting $60-70/hr range. I've been temping since I graduated undergrad in '93, with a few temporarily full-time jobs in there. I started working jobs that paid $9 - $12/hr but thanks to my typing abilities (that BA in lit comes in handy after all) I now qualify for $17-$18/hr legal work. It has seemed to me, from my observation, that the lower payed temps have tended to seek full-time employ. Maybe the higher pay makes up for the lack of benefits and security, whereas living with lack of benefits and lack of security at $9/hr can mean much anxiety and unhappiness.
If the BLS considers temp work to include the whole range, from industrial temps driving forklifts and pushing pallet jacks around for short-term projects, to receptionists to word processors on up to subcontractors of various sorts...that's a pretty big umbrella. With such a wide income-range doesn't the stat get evacuated of some of its usefullness? Perhaps the happy half are the upper half of the rather large income bracket(?).
-Alec
______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com