<p>No one was fired and I am not sure about an apology. The person I believe to have been the ringleader had another tantrum last week. I think the decision of whether to keep them in the space is still pending. Sme of the powers that be want them off site and are using this as an excuse. I don’t know what will happen.</p>
<p>This policy must vary considerably from employer type to employer type. I worked as a long term substitute in a school, as a contracted worker, not only was I invites to several of the school and district holiday parties, but my coworkers also gave me several very nice gifts. And I was invited again this year, even though I am not working there.</p>
<p>Zoosermom, what %age of your office is temp folks? </p>
<p>I don’t know…I understand that these are contracted employees, and they don’t get the same benefits as fully employed workers, but seriously…a party for everyone who is employed there held ON the premises…and they couldn’t be invited. It just sounds CHEAP to me to do this.</p>
<p>If this had been an off site, evening event for the company employees, I’d understand. But on site? Just seems insensitive…and cheap.</p>
<p>The bottom line IMO is that this behavior is unacceptable. Whether or not the timing of the party ( which coincided with the move, not the holiday) is irrelevant. This is not Thor grade where you have to give everyone a valentine. Sounds like there were others not invited bit only the temps had the misplaced sense of entitlement.</p>
<p>thumper1 - but you were an employee before you became a contractor, so that’s a huge difference.</p>
<p>Holiday party is a time for employees to relax and bond with each other. Short term contractors are just that. I have employed a lot of contractors. When offered for them to become employees, a lot of them preferred to remain as contractors because the pay was better and they didn’t want to get involved with the company political. They have no vested interest in the company. I could see why a company would decide only to include employees at its holiday party. </p>
<p>We recently had an all expense paid for offsite (2 days). Only full time employees were invited.</p>
<p>I would have fired all of those contractors who crashed the party.</p>
<p>I was not an employee of this school in the past. It was a different district entirely.</p>
<p>But I understand Oldfort’s explanation. These employees accepted the terms of contracted employees.</p>
<p>Ack typos! This is not third grade.
Whether or not the party was in poor taste is irrelevant. The behavior of the temps was inexcusable.
And as an aside- I asked DH about his company party ( the company uses many contractors). Nope- not invited. FTE’s only.</p>
<p>My husband and I were contractors for the same firm for about seven months. We were paid very well (1 1/2 times the average salary for engineers). We understood that we weren’t part of the company - they just needed us to get through a big project at a paper mill. We were actually surprised to get paid for holidays and sick days! We were NOT included at weekly meetings or parties, and we were fine with that. We just very happily deposited our large paychecks every couple of weeks!</p>
<p>Ds#1 was a contracter before he hired on full time at his current job. It was clear ( no email, perks, etc) till he was a FTE</p>
<p>Just a thing about me…I worked as a teacher in a school district. I believe the contract worker situation in private business is very different. This thread has clarified that.</p>
<p>Regardless…there is absolutely NO excuse for poor and rude behavior. Also, it sounds vey much like these contracted workers knew the lay of the land. Whether they agreed or disagreed is irrelevant. It is never the right thing to attend any event to which one has NOT received an invitation to attend. And to then act obnoxious on top of that…</p>
<p>There have to be other contractors who can replace the current ill mannered ones.</p>
<p>Thumper, this fall there are between 50 and 100 temp attorneys at the firm, depending on the day. I just want to reiterate that in law firms, contract attorneys work for the firm, but temporary attorneys work for an agency. The contract attorneys are treated like every other firm employee and were invited. The temp attorneys and other temps were not invited.</p>
<p>zoosermom–your last post puts it quite succinctly–The law firm invited EMPLOYEES to the party; the temps are NOT employees of the law firm–they are employees of the temp agency.</p>
<p>And that makes sense. Folks working FOR the firm get invited. Temps working for an agency do not.</p>
<p>Zoos your company should also voice their dissatisfaction with the temp agency, IMO.</p>
<p>I have three, somewhat random thoughts on this:
- As my great-great-grandmother once told my mom, kindness is never wasted. Generating goodwill is always a wise investment.
- In my own experience, cheapness is very often wasted, as it leads to bitterness, conflict, and ill will.
- Work parties always suck. Even if the food is free and delicious and the booze is of superior quality AND you like your colleagues, do you really want to party with them?</p>
<p>In light of #1 and #2, I think the company made a huge mistake by not inviting everyone and just buying cheaper food. In light of #3, nobody who was left out really missed anything.</p>
<p>I would never want to work at a firm where there was this two or more caste system. It sounds awful having JDs who are doing menial jobs and aren’t even invited to a simple holiday party, being held IN THE BUILDING, DURING OFFICE HOURS.</p>
<p>That said, I would never crash such a party, just would NEVER work at such a firm and would work at a food service position before working at that firm. I’m not sure the bad feelings between the temps and “the others” can be mended. </p>
<p>I think it shows a huge lack of sensitivity that the party was planned and executed as it was. What is the point of a party, when it creates such ill will?</p>
<p>Massmom, there was no booze. This was not the holiday party. The food was absolutely amazing. The issue was less about money than about space. It is because there isn’t enough space that we are moving, this the party. There would never have been enough space to have added another 100 people for the food at this party, which is why it is a large part of the reason for being employees only. Everything right now is about accommodating the space problem. The party with booze and less amazing food was the actual holiday party, to which they were invited and did attend.</p>
<p>HImom, as I said before, the point of this party was to reminisce about the years In The space, to honor those people who are no longer present, to blow off steam while packing, for the firm to thank everyone for working so hard in such crowded conditions to make it possible, and to wish for a successful future.</p>
<p>So they were invited to the holiday party. This makes crashing the other event even more in poor taste. </p>
<p>Like I said, the agency that employs them should be notified.</p>
<p>They were invited to THE holiday party? That was a very important fact Zoos left out. I don’t know about others, I assumed this was the company’s holiday party, so I could even sympathize a bit. This additional fact made those temps sound even worse.</p>
<p>Please clarify for me (I’m really not trying to be obtuse).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So was there a separate holiday party or not?</p>
<p>There was a separate holiday party off site, which I have said a bunch of times. A traditional, evening party with alcohol and dancing. I didn’t leave that out. I have said it repeatedly. They were invited to and most attended that party. They were not invited to the moving at holiday time internal party, as were not other temps, vendors and any people in site who are not employed by the firm. The contract attorneys employed by the firm were invited to the internal party.</p>