The law firm Pillsbury Winthrop hired 80 people for a one week project, and then fired 60 of them on the spot. I guess there wasn't enough cookie dough to go around after all.Oh man, that sucks. My agency was HIRECounsel. I got a mass email about it and I emailed the recruiter with all the pertinent info (my availability, my conidentiality forms). I was told the "Training" would be held March 1st at 4 pm Eastern Time (1 PM Pacific), then it was "delayed". On Sat afternoon (yesterday at 4 pm), HIRECounsel sent a mass email to all the temps saying basically "well sorry but Pillsbury decided to choose their own temps and if you havent received an email saying you're on the project, then you arent on it. But anyways, let us know if you are available for other assignments next week!
3 comments:
The contract attorneys on my project just received a visit today from two fake blonde bimbos representing our agency. One of the legitimate grievances that was voiced was the issue of raises. Our project has been going on since 2002 with no end in site. Our rate, $35 / per hour, while perhaps competitive in 2005 is no longer ther market rate. This and other grievances were given poorly reasoned lip service while the bimbos pandered to its real client. Agencies have a huge inherent conflict of interest.
The reason the Pillsbury firm fired that many temps (or 'reduced the # of temps needed significantly', as they stated in the email) was to utilize temps from the prior Pillsbury project concerning ECHO (Electronic Clearing House) and they probably wanted to maintain continuity of staff on the project, plus they didnt want to waste time training new people for a doc review that would only last a few days anyway. Its pretty shady though, how the firm contracted for all this labor, and then discharged us without fanfare only a few hours before the scheduled training. It really sucked.
HireCounsel is a very good agency that believe or not looks out for its contractors. The problem here was definitely Pillsbury.
Post a Comment