I worked for two different Kelly Services offices in Florida (Largo/St. Pete and Pensacola (iirc)) in the 1990's and it was nothing like the article. I actually had a good experience. I worked similar jobs to the ones mentioned in the article (warehouse, plastics manufacturing, construction, moving furniture, etc.) I always transported my self to the job sites and never found no work when I got there. The pay was above minimum and I would specifically ask for 3rd shift work (because it paid a 50% premium).
There were some jobs that were always "temp" - like one time government construction contracts. But, usually the way the process worked at that time was that employers were basically using Kelly to "screen" workers. They'd bring you in as a temp. and after six months if you were still there they'd transition you to permanent position. If they didn't asked you to come back as a temp, Kelly would just send you somewhere else. Sometimes, you'd not get asked back due to an inability to do the job (I once wasn't because I was asked to hand paint the buttons for tv remotes and just didn't have the dexterity for that) but usually it was because of a chronic problem. As you can imagine with people working temp jobs many had "issues". Plenty of people missed work because they were arrested for DUI's or drug related crime the night before. Some had their probation violated. Several showed up drunk or high. One guy had a medical issue (epilepsy) and had a seizure on the factory floor while operating heavy machinery. Using temps let the companies easily handle those types of problems with out interrupting their business. Part of it was not having to involve HR in the "firing" process by just letting the shift supervisor and Kelly handle it. But, it was also that they could just easily get a different temp. There was no need to put an add in the paper and have a person interviewed and entered into the payroll system etc.
I guess it's possible that things have gotten much worse since I worked for Kelly. Or, that things may be different in poor US inner cities (which I make it a point to stay away from). But, it's probably just some sensationalism in the writing of the article and some exaggerated hearsay from the temps. Notice that there's no pictures or any other evidence like that of the articles' most egregious statements.
There were some jobs that were always "temp" - like one time government construction contracts. But, usually the way the process worked at that time was that employers were basically using Kelly to "screen" workers. They'd bring you in as a temp. and after six months if you were still there they'd transition you to permanent position. If they didn't asked you to come back as a temp, Kelly would just send you somewhere else. Sometimes, you'd not get asked back due to an inability to do the job (I once wasn't because I was asked to hand paint the buttons for tv remotes and just didn't have the dexterity for that) but usually it was because of a chronic problem. As you can imagine with people working temp jobs many had "issues". Plenty of people missed work because they were arrested for DUI's or drug related crime the night before. Some had their probation violated. Several showed up drunk or high. One guy had a medical issue (epilepsy) and had a seizure on the factory floor while operating heavy machinery. Using temps let the companies easily handle those types of problems with out interrupting their business. Part of it was not having to involve HR in the "firing" process by just letting the shift supervisor and Kelly handle it. But, it was also that they could just easily get a different temp. There was no need to put an add in the paper and have a person interviewed and entered into the payroll system etc.
I guess it's possible that things have gotten much worse since I worked for Kelly. Or, that things may be different in poor US inner cities (which I make it a point to stay away from). But, it's probably just some sensationalism in the writing of the article and some exaggerated hearsay from the temps. Notice that there's no pictures or any other evidence like that of the articles' most egregious statements.