At least they're transparent about it. Plenty of people end up working at companies with this attitude without ever knowing it. Especially in sales orgs.
My job basically prefers the Contract-to-Hire pipeline. One is often hired on as a contractor, and if things work out by the time your contract is up, then you can stay. In a sense, we are doing something similar to AppSumo.
I take issue with these because they're really just doing an endrun around labor law:
- you're going to be treated like an employee, because that's the plan, and I'd wager many Contract-to-Hire setups would fail the government's "20 Factor Test"[1]: Level of instruction, degree of integration, demands for full-time work...
- I've yet to see a non-VP+ level contract with severability clauses that require contractual compensation, i.e. most contracts are "severable without notice", no different to "At Will"
Indeed, the practical side effect of this is "We're going to hire you and we get to avoid paying you benefits for an extended period of time (the contract duration)."
There is the case where you are employed by a firm as a W-2, and you are a "contractor" in the eyes of the company you are doing the work for. And more often than not, after 6-18 months the company offers to buy out the contract to from your employer, converting you to full time.
They don't have to pay you benefits of course, but you can always market yourself at a rate that more than compensates for that. So it's not an automatic financial shafting for the contractor (unless they don't take this into account).
There is not a chance I would leave a real job for a gig like that. I can't imagine many folks who have mortgages and families to support would consider it.
Actually, I was the last junior hired -- 8 years ago. Somehow, my org is able to find mid-level to senior people.
However, we do not really have such titles since it's a very small shop. So, perhaps I am not the best at judging whom is truly a mid-level vs. senior.
