Opinions on Recruiting Companies and Contracts?

[samman1994]

Hello everyone,

I've been looking for work lately, and have found the work place quite competitive (still jobless after a month). I've turned to recruitment companies for biotech/pharma and it appears most of them do contract jobs. The general concensus I've been able to obtain from others though is negative, and they've told me recruitment companies should be a last resort. I'm curious what you guys think? And if recruitment companies aren't "so great" why so? So far, they've been able to connect me with 2 interviews the last week alone, so it seems like they're really good. It also appears more and more pharma companies are basically using these recruitment companies to hire employees instead of direct hire, which makes it even more important to use said recruitment companies. 

Edited August 19, 2017 by samman1994

[rising_star]

If I were doing a contract job, I'd want several things clearly outlined such as, whether there are any benefits, how you'll be paid (W-2 vs 1099, which has huge tax implications), whether contracts can be renewed (and if so, the process by which this occurs), and whether and how often contract employees are hired by the employer.

[samman1994]

On 8/22/2017 at 9:20 AM, rising_star said:

If I were doing a contract job, I'd want several things clearly outlined such as, whether there are any benefits, how you'll be paid (W-2 vs 1099, which has huge tax implications), whether contracts can be renewed (and if so, the process by which this occurs), and whether and how often contract employees are hired by the employer.

Would you be able to find all those online? Or do they vary job by job. 

[TakeruK]

2 hours ago, samman1994 said:

Would you be able to find all those online? Or do they vary job by job. 

Job by job.

If it's a giant company that regularly offer contract/term positions, you might be able to find information about what are typically offered if you talk to people who have done these things etc. And many of these things are at least vaguely described in the job posting. But even if you do find information, since contracts can be individual, it's still a good idea to do what rising_star said with the actual offer you have.

[samman1994]

On 8/22/2017 at 9:20 AM, rising_star said:

If I were doing a contract job, I'd want several things clearly outlined such as, whether there are any benefits, how you'll be paid (W-2 vs 1099, which has huge tax implications), whether contracts can be renewed (and if so, the process by which this occurs), and whether and how often contract employees are hired by the employer.

So I've talked to a few recruiting companies, and it appears most pharma companies don't do direct hire anymore, but through these recruiters. From the gist I've gotten, all of them are contract jobs. I.e. the recruiter pays my paychecks, not the company I will be working, thus, the wage discussion is with the recruiter not the company. I do not get benefits of the company, but instead benefits of the recruiter (w.e. they may be). I don't know who sets the time (how many hours I work and when). Renewal of contracts is almost always up to the company, not the recruiter, and I would have to reapply to the company itself if I wanted to become permanently employed. They always tell me some people get employed permanently by the employer, some don't. So never really a clear answer.

The main thing that has arisen however is, I looked up what the W-2 vs. 1099 is, and am a little confused. So W-2 is your standard tax form given to anyone who works retail, fast-food, or any normal salary job. The 1099 appears to be more self-employed people doing whatever it is they're doing. Now the thing I'm confused is as to my position. It appears I am an employee for the recruiting company, I have a set salary wage, and set hours (I don't know if my recruiter sets my hours or the company). However, I have been told, and it appears, I am a contractor for the company I will be working for. They tell me they only want me to work there for a year, but they can terminate it, or extend it at anytime (I have been told I can terminate it at anytime as well). Now the thing I'm confused is: I appear to be an employee of the recruiting company, but a contractor for the company I will be working in. So from one angle, it appears I will be using the W-2, but from another angle, it appears the 1099 would be more applicable. This whole system seems a little bit confusing, and I don't want to get swindled in the process. Any help would be appreciated!

Edited August 30, 2017 by samman1994

[TakeruK]

@samman1994: What you describe actually sound very normal for science research positions. (Note: Not saying that it's the majority of situations, I don't know how it's split up, but I know many scientists working on these types of contracts).

For example, many of the scientists working at NASA are actually on contracts. The only people directly employed by NASA are actually US government employees, and they do hire many scientists and engineers of course. But a lot of scientists actually work for USRA (Universities Space Research Association) and NASA contracts scientists from USRA to work on NASA projects. This is generally helpful because the US government has pretty strict rules on who it employs but less strict rules on who it contracts to do work.

If I had to guess, I would say you are likely to get a W-2 from your recruiting company (i.e. your employer). The 1099 isn't just for any contractor, it's specifically for independent contractors. The relationship you describe between you and the recruiting company sounds like an employment relationship instead of a contractor relationship. You're working as a contractor for the pharma company, but you're not actually contracted by them. The recruiting company has a contract/agreement with the pharma company to provide X workers with Y skills for Z hours, i.e. the recruiting company is actually the contractor, and you're working on behalf of the recruiting company, your employer. So, the shorthand is to say that you're a contractor for the pharma company, but do you see how it's a little different? If you were an independent contractor, you would be setting your own hours and negotiating wages directly with the pharma company.

But the only way to find out for sure is to ask your employer (i.e. the recruiting company). So, if the difference between W-2 and 1099 matters to you at this stage, then you should ask the recruiting companies when you apply to them how you will be taxed (i.e. what form you will receive). It might not matter at this stage though, you can (and should) ask again before accepting any contract.

[samman1994]

1 hour ago, TakeruK said:

@samman1994: What you describe actually sound very normal for science research positions. (Note: Not saying that it's the majority of situations, I don't know how it's split up, but I know many scientists working on these types of contracts).

For example, many of the scientists working at NASA are actually on contracts. The only people directly employed by NASA are actually US government employees, and they do hire many scientists and engineers of course. But a lot of scientists actually work for USRA (Universities Space Research Association) and NASA contracts scientists from USRA to work on NASA projects. This is generally helpful because the US government has pretty strict rules on who it employs but less strict rules on who it contracts to do work.

If I had to guess, I would say you are likely to get a W-2 from your recruiting company (i.e. your employer). The 1099 isn't just for any contractor, it's specifically for independent contractors. The relationship you describe between you and the recruiting company sounds like an employment relationship instead of a contractor relationship. You're working as a contractor for the pharma company, but you're not actually contracted by them. The recruiting company has a contract/agreement with the pharma company to provide X workers with Y skills for Z hours, i.e. the recruiting company is actually the contractor, and you're working on behalf of the recruiting company, your employer. So, the shorthand is to say that you're a contractor for the pharma company, but do you see how it's a little different? If you were an independent contractor, you would be setting your own hours and negotiating wages directly with the pharma company.

But the only way to find out for sure is to ask your employer (i.e. the recruiting company). So, if the difference between W-2 and 1099 matters to you at this stage, then you should ask the recruiting companies when you apply to them how you will be taxed (i.e. what form you will receive). It might not matter at this stage though, you can (and should) ask again before accepting any contract.

Yep, it appears most pharm companies don't direct hire anymore, but rather do contracts. And yes i understand, i'll ask, but it appears I'm an employee for the contractor, but not the company I'd be working for. Thanks for your help! I have an interview tomorrow, so hopefully it goes well. Thank you!

[camth]

This maybe a late reply, but I am not a huge fan. Although I have been told that as you said a lot of pharma/biotech companies don't do direct hire anymore. My problem with them is 1) When I think I have multiple job offers but they're all really just different recruiters contacting me about the same position. 2) It seems to be slightly more difficult to determine whether or not the position is a good fit from a recruiter phone interview 3) But mainly it's the inconsistencies in pay because the recruiter gotta get their cut I guess and I have seen the same job posting different places with different pricing sometimes a whole 3 dollars/hr difference.

The drastic salary difference is due to it being displayed as a range some places and solid number other places

Edited December 8, 2017 by camth
Clarification