Wanted: “Temporary Training Assistant”. Not “assistance” but rather they are hiring a temporary position, which begs to wonder why they are recruiting a full-time hire instead of a 1099 contractor?
I get it. At times you need a little help on a project, or the work load suddenly became too much for the staff you have and you need a temporary person to come in and bail you out of a situation. Hello! This is why and when you hire a contract person. Talented, ready to work, and you need only agree on the scope of the project and a fee. In, out and you pay the bill.
So why is a company spending dollars and time to hire a single person through the normal recruiting process? If you need to hire someone to help now, does it make sense waiting months to recruit and hire someone? And the best part of this transaction is that a professional recruiter was hired to find a temporary instructional designer to complete a single design project. So the company is paying someone to recruit for a full-time employee for a 3 month project.
My HR friends tell me there is a lot more risk in hiring an employee and then letting them go when a project is over than hiring a 1099 contractor. Once the employer-employee relationship kicks in, so many more protections are in place, and it really gets challenging if the person is needed past their agreed time. In this case, if the project goes past the 3 months, the temporary status could easily be interpreted as permanent employee status. With a 1099 arrangement, you just negotiate additional scope and fee.
So I see no benefit in hiring an employee for a temporary assignment, when you could contract with a 1099 solution. Does anyone have an idea why this is done, and how it benefits the operation?