Being ignored for direct hire

Question

I joined a very prestigious lab as "senior implementation engineer" vs more academic researchers on the team, because they needed someone from industry to actually deliver prototypes for both commercialization and further funding.

I have been there for 4 years.

I joined a major failing project and helped deliver both several prototypes on time and I led the research paper as 1st author, because the actual researchers dropped the ball.

These projects are all combinations of cutting edge software & hardware, and my success rate has been 60%-70%, because we are pushing the limits vs my other colleagues who actually have success rates that are below a 40-50% success rate.

In 2 projects, I actually helped publish papers as the lead author, in addition to my engineering role. Going beyond my role.

Academically, I have MEng (professional masters in engineering) whereas my colleagues mostly have PhDs. I still exceed their performance.

However, management refuses to hire me as an direct employee, without giving any "real" reasons and blame budgets which I know is not true. I'm missing out on promotions, raises, education reimbursement, and better 401K.

I asked my manager several times for a fulltime job and he always says he doesn't have the budget, which doesn't make sense since for every $1 that I make they pay another 60 cents to the staffing company.

Finally, I went above my boss and asked the company director for a "full time" job and sighted my success. He offered me another contract position with another division! He completely ignored my request for direct hire

I don't want to abandon 4 years of relationship (although I may have to), however I'm not sure why they ignore my demands for fulltime job?

Why are they willing to:

1. Pay 60% more to outsource

2. Risk losing a lead engineer

3. Why is a PhD so important if my papers are being published anyway???

Appreciate your feedback.

Answer 1

Pay 60% more to outsource

The likely issue is that is probably financially simplier to pay you a fixed contract, rather than lock you in as an employee. If grants are involved, it probably makes for far simplier account-keeping. They give you a contract across the project length and when the project ends they don't need to find another project for you.

Risk loosing a lead engineer

It is not uncommon for organisations to act in ways that annoy its employees.

Why is Phd so important if my papers are being published anyways???

That question isn't really for here.

I don't want to abandon 4 years of relationship (although I may have to), however I'm not sure why they ignore my demands for fulltime job?

I completely understand where you are coming from. But they probably don't have that mentality.

It's very normal for people in some industries to transition from contract work to direct employment, especially as they get older and need more job security. (e.g. Family, settling down) The reality is that not every employer is able to grant that transition, for a number of reasons.

I'm missing out on promotions, raises, education reimbursement, and better 401K.

Well, yes, you are on a contract, so you don't get that stuff. But when you renegotiate your contract, you should be factoring these things in. Don't automatically roll over your contract. Every year you work there, your worth increases. That's the risk they run by putting you on a contract. Once that contract ends, you are under no obligation to continue.

Contract rollover (maybe with inflation adjustment) makes perfect sense if you are an established worker, and there are no improvements to output or worth year-on-year. That is almost certainly not the case for you.

Answer 2

not having budget could be right. stupid but right. budgets often come in buckets, and maybe he has enough budget in the bucket external hire, but not enough in internal hire. And we don't know how much more expensive you being an external really is, as they don't have to pay some expenses they would if you were a direct hire.

some companies have rules to ensure fair promotions. And this may include stuff like a PHD. It's simply not in their rules that somebody with lesser education could outperform somebody with higher education... Or they care more about appearances than fairness. We won't know.

You should start searching for a new job. Once you have an offer, let them know your conditions of staying: If they accept, you stay. If not: That's just the way external people go.

Answer 3

They may be telling you the truth - it could actually be the budget. Just because a company seems to be doing well, doesn't mean that it is. Only the management knows how how much money it is bleeding or how profitable they are despite raking in the revenue (your service or products might have increased the revenue the company makes, but it doesn't mean thaty are making a profit). Contract employees often are much cheaper to a company as they don't have to be offered a lot of the benefit that a full time employee get.

Why are they willing to: Pay 60% more to outsource

Short term expenses are easier to accommodate and can often be more easily justified by the result they get. (Or it could be a foolish business decision too).

Why are they willing to: Risk loosing a lead engineer

Either they believe they are not going to lose you and / or you are over-estimating how much the company needs you.

Why is Phd so important if my papers are being published anyways???

For the same reason that your Master degree is valued more than someone's Bachelors degree. That said, like you pointed out, it doesn't necessarily mean that a Phd candidate is better than you. Some industries do have minimum stipulated norms / standards they have to adhere to (to meet some government regulation or to meet investor demands).

So what should you do? Have you clearly explained to the director that your major concern was future growth, and specifically "missing out on promotions, raises, education reimbursement, and better 401K" unambiguously? Note "unambiguously" - not hinted or suggested. And if all they can still offer you is another contract position on another division without a better pay, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate your professional goals and take other steps to increase your value in the job market.

Answer 4

"I don't want to abandon 4 years of relationship "

Your 4 years of relationship are being a long-term contractor, and they seem to be happy with that.

"I'm not sure why they ignore my demands for fulltime job?"

There could be many reasons, as have been pointed out above. However, by now one additional reason is that they've done this for 4 years, you haven't left, and they figure that you won't.

[note that "figure" here might mean that the corporate structure is based on that, despite what your boss and his/her boss believes or knows about you.]

Answer 5

Of course it would be nice for a company to get people from a staffing company, try them out for a while, and when they like the people they get to cut out the middle-man by offering those people a direct employment. But that would be rather bad for the staffing company. They would lose both a good employee and a client.

Which is why staffing companies usually insist on very strict non-poaching clauses. The company might not be permitted to even talk to you about working for them directly, or they might get hit by a hefty penalty fee and find themselves blacklisted from that staffing agency.

So if you want to work for the client directly, you need to find out what exactly is in that non-poaching clause and see if there is a way to work around it.