Is it wage discrimination for my employer not to give me benefits like its other full-time employees?

I work in California. I've been working for this company for about 4 months. I started off at 32 hours/week and am now working 40 hours/week. They say that I'm a "temp," so I only get my hourly wage.
There are other people doing the same job as me that are "permanent" employees. They get their hourly wage plus benefits (vacations, holidays off, health care, etc.).
Is it considered wage discrimination for my employer not to give me the same benefits as other full time employees doing the same job? Is there some California or Federal law that requires my employer to give me the same benefits?
I've heard that after 6 months of full-time work, employers in California are required to give you the same benefits as other full-time employees. Is this true?
Thank you for your help!
Additional Details
The reason I ask is because the answer to this earlier question suggests that I can't be denied equivalent benefits as my other full-time co-workers. See http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070611105609AA7Mahk

michr

there is no law, state or federal, that requires any benefits be provided.
if benefits are provided the process of qualifying is set by the employer. all the law requires is the employer follow their own policy, whatever that may be. if you are classified as temporary by the employer then you are temporary and how long you are employed has no bearing on the companies classification of you.

EDIT:
that is a nice answer in the link it is a shame that it is almost totally wrong.
it incorrectly explains and addresses what equal pay is and it implies that the law defines what full-time and part-time is which is not the case. the terms full-time and part-time have no basis in labor law and are used by some employers to determine who qualifies for benefits. the individual employer determines their own definition of what full-time is and who qualifies for benefits.
for info concerning California labor law see:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/DLSE-FAQs.htm

for info about what is and is NOT discrimination including equal pay laws see:
http://www.eeoc.gov

SmartA$$

No, its not discrimination. You are classified as a different type of employee.

If other temporary employees were receiving benefits and you weren't then you might have a case. But since you are a temp, and the others are permanent, they can offer different terms.

Mel

As a temporary employee, you are probably employed through a temporary employment agency. The agency is your employer of record and if they provide their employees with any benefits, you should be eligible to participate in those programs.

The company has the option to convert you to a "direct" employee (you work directly for the company rather than through the temp agency.) If/when that happens, you would be entitled to the same benefits that other direct employees receive.

Companies are permitted to use temporary employees for weeks or months without ever converting them to direct. The legal precedent here is a Microsoft case several years ago, in which MS laid off a lot of direct and temp employees. The direct folks got severance benefits - temps didn't. The temps sued, claiming that they were really "direct" employees because they had worked for MS for years in some cases. The court ruling was that temps who had been on board over a year and met some other criteria were entitled to be treated like direct employees. So, most companies now convert temps at the 12-month point if they are going to offer them direct employment.

Sorry for the long-winded answer - the short version is that there is no requirement for the company to convert you to direct or offer you benefits until you have temped for them for quite a bit longer than 4 months. Sorry.....

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: