On December 21, 2022, the Star-Ledger published an editorial “End the abuse of temp worker and New Jersey taxpayers.”((The editorial was also published on NJ.com, under the title “Temp agencies exploit taxpayers, too.” I don’t see the value to the reader of having different titles for the same content.)) The ostensible position is that temporary workers are exploited and the Legislature should pass what the editorial calls a “a Temp Workers Bill of Rights.”((The editorial declares that temporary workers “are often subject to unpaid wages, unsafe conditions, overtime violations, and illegal deductions from their paychecks.” Such conduct is already illegal, so why a specific “bill of rights” for temporary workers is needed is not clear to me.))
The real position, however, seems to be mandating that temporary workers be paid the same, and receive the same benefits, as permanent employees.((Part of the reason that employers seek temporary workers, leased from staffing agencies, is that government-mandated benefits for traditional employees have become too expensive. Employers hire fewer employees and expect their current staffs to do more.)) Indeed, the editorial goes so far as to assert that the fact many temporary workers qualify for Medicaid means that the taxpayers are subsidizing((If an employer is paying an employee and providing benefits for a job function that is not worth the total cost of employment to the employer, who is doing the subsidizing?)) their employers.1 So here we have the real point, all employers (at least those, unlike newspapers presumably, that can afford to do so) should be required “to meet their employees’ healthcare needs.”
It’s easy to editorialize in favor of greater benefits so long as “someone else is paying.”
Jay Bohn
December 26, 2022
- I wonder if the Star-Ledger walks the walk as well as talks the talk. Do all of its employees, temporary or permanent, receive the same benefits, including health insurance? I have previously posted how the Star-Ledger‘s policies with regard to delivery persons does not match its editorial position on the minimum wage: What’s Good for the Goose I: Practice What You Preach and about its attempt to secure special labor rules for newspapers: Importance of Newspapers Does Not Justify Special Exemption From Labor Laws; Newspaper Industry Must Find Way to Improve ABC Test For all Industries, Not Just Seek Exemption for Itself; and Special Treatment for Newspapers Would Impair Their ‘Watchdog’ Role. [↩]