For me, it is not a good thing. There are so many reasons why it is not a good option for people who wanted to have regular jobs. One thing for sure is that there are some compensation schemes not included, such as hazard pay, no chance of working with them regularly, etc. That is why it is not ideal.
Is signing a short-term contract good or not?
- Thread starter Shavkat
- Start date
No, I do not prefer signing short-term contract. Normally, workers on short-term contract are not entitled to some fringe benefits such as medical insurance and paid leave. I prefer a regular, permanent job which provides me with career advancement opportunities.
Short term contract is common here now. We call it casual work. Most companies are using casual workers in their businesses.
Being a casual worker, you are denied lots of benefits. Your earning is based on the number of days you work. You are not entitled to go for official leaves. Trade union activities do not affect you. Infact, you are on your own.
Short terms contracts are something that is a lot more common now than it used to be. With many people needing a job, they are pushed to take these smaller short-term contracts just to have a job even if they know that it may not be something that will last and they will be looking for another job again at some point.
As much as signing a short-term agreement is not something many want to do, in some cases if it means having a job and gaining experience even only for a little, it is better than nothing.
As much as signing a short-term agreement is not something many want to do, in some cases if it means having a job and gaining experience even only for a little, it is better than nothing.
I have long contract ( on indefinitely) and it give me big security. But if you are not satisfied with your job it can be problem. You don't want lose security but in same time you would like change job. I am in such situation.
If you work part time, you don't have a choice but to sign the contract for a short term duration of work like 1 sem, 1 year or three years. If apply full time you also have short term contract provided could be extended based on your work performance.
As long as the payment that you are getting in the long contract is very good, I believe that it serves more than having a short-term contract because of what you talked about having job security.
Many people who long of doing long term employment facility if available. But the present situation has thwarted it.
Most of the available vacancies are taken over by the job contractors who serve a the middlemen between the company and the workers. Workers are paid in wages as casual workers.
If there's no choice, you'll be forced to accept a shot term contract to save your financial need. There are companies that give extension to those under short term contract and sometimes if seen they're good at work, they'll be recommended to become full time regular employees.
There's also a short term contract that I accepted, 3 months contract package. The pay was so reasonable almost $3000 in 3 months time teaching Calculus to a special class foreign students from Seoul, Korea and Vietnam 15 of them. But I'm using my own projector, Big laptop and microphone. And I did well hehe. The pay was given to me monthly.
- Thread starter
- #17
I also felt disappointed that some government agencies are into this scheme. Instead of helping the locals, they are taking advantage the situation for denying essential compensations. I hope they would realize this fact.
I prefer a short term contracts because it affords the parties a quick opportunity to review grey areas in the contract. Long term contracts are like jail terms where you don't even have hope no matter how bad the contract turns out to be.
This is the present situation in my country as well especially in the banking sector because it is very difficult for you to see anyone that is going to hire any staff on a long-term contract.