Summary. In the past years we can observe major changes in economic environment. New companies emerge; existing companies strengthen their position on the market, facing the turbulent changes in the field; and the third category of companies which keep their conservative views are being ruined. Flexibility has become one of the most critical indicators. The companies are searching for ways to reduce company costs. As we know, the labour costs have a major proportion in setting company costs, this is why decreasing these costs have positive effects on the company. One of the ways to decrease them is to hire contingent workers, this becoming a major economic tool and representing a segment of labour market that is developing fast (Jeroen, 2007). Table of ContentsIntroduction.....2 Literature Review2 Conclusion..5 References..6

IntroductionThe economic, political, social changes in the world oblige the companies to respect new rules and a certain degree of flexibility while developing their activities. The companies should be constantly searching methods to increase their productivity and efficiency. This helps them stay economically competitive on the market. In order to maintain or obtain an economic growth, companies use new opportunities to reduce the costs and increase the efficiency. Economic crisis showed that if companies do not improve the quality of goods and services, do not focus on innovations and do not work with their costumers they do not have many chances to survive. The purpose of this literature review is to determine who are contingent workers, their role in organizations and to find out if they represent the tool that may help companies to perform in extreme working condition. Literature ReviewContingent (temporary) workers are persons which are paid by companies for a certain period of time (one week, a month, a season) in order to accomplish specific kind of tasks (George and Jones, 2011) contingent workers include contract company workers, agency temps, on-call workers/ day laborers, direct-hire temps, self-employed workers, independent contractors, and standard part-time workers (Martin and Sinclair, 2007; Way and Lepak, 2010, p. 110).Contingent workforce represents a component of the total company staff, being a part of labour market that is developing fast. Using the temporary workforce allows companies to fill in the number of workers that are temporary absent, to protect core workforce (Cappellari and Leonardi, 2012); to change the number of workers to perform a certain tasks, to face the market demand (Cardon, 2003; Boeri and Garibaldi, 2007; Way and Lepak, 2010); to increase the number of hired people in a boom (Boeri and Garibaldi, 2007); to provide organizations with labour flexibility, reductions in labour costs (Jeroen, 2007; p. 492., Uzzi and Barsness, 1998); start work after an inactive period (Heinrich, Meuser and Troske, 2005). According to Antoni (2009) the temporary workers demand is focused in factories where low-skilled workforces needed, but in the research of Way and Lepak (2010) we discover a different approach that examines the way companies get access to the specific skills of the contingent workers for a specific period of time.The temporary employment is considered secondary to a permanent job, as a result there appeared the governmental dilemma in treating fairly the workers rights based on non-discrimination principles on one side and keeping labour market flexibility on the other side (Jeroen, 2007; Nienhuser, 2005). Because the position of temporary workers was unstable in the last decades and UE undertook political and legislative measures in setting international labour laws. This set of laws has the purpose to treat equally all type of workforce. As a consequence the number of contingent workers increased in EU ( Jeroen, 2007, p. 493).Oppositely to the above mentioned idea, Cappellari and Leonardi (2012) assumed that temporary employment protection can cause negative effects. The high protection of temporary workers may lead to their redistribution in companies, as a result the workers with specific skills are replaced by workers with general skills (Wasmer, 2006); to lessen employees outcome (Ichino and Riphahn, 2005; Riphahn and Engellandt, 2005; Dolado et al., 2012, Cahuc et al. 2012, Cappellari and Leonardi, 2012); reduces the possibility to perform high profit activities (Bartelsman and Hinloopen, 2005; Cappellari and Leonardi, 2012).It is difficult to make a general conclusion about temporary workers efficiency without making an analyses of their impact on the organizations. Being limited in time and by economic environmental changes, the companies face a dilemma regarding their process of adapting to external technological, competitive, and labour market pressures through a motivated and skilled permanent workforce or flexibility and labour-cost reduction (Jeroen, 2007, p. 502). According to the Autor and Houseman (2009) the companies turn to part-time workers in order to improve the quality of goods and services or to increase product quantity. However, because the temporary workforces have general skills and this may cause companies income decrease. This type of workforce represent challenge for Human Resource Management as they can not be stimulated with career promotion, compensation and other benefits (George and Jones, 2011). The companies have start to adapt to the situation, depending on the complexity of the specific services needed. They use this type of workforce in cases when do not need high skills (Autor and Houseman, 2009) or can offer short term training in order to obtain specific skills (Albert, 2005; Cappellari and Leonardi, 2012). As result the organizations may benefit from the following advantages: (1) temporary workforces reduce companies costs; (2) the workers can leave when their service are not needed anymore (George and Jones, 2011; Llobet and Fito, 2013). With these companies started to look for solutions in hiring contingent workforces. Way and Lepak (2010) suggest that firms may benefits from workforce mixing, including permanent and temporary workers; this allows the companies increase their flexibility depending on market demand and may have positive influence on the employment stability of permanent workforce. In the unpredictable economic environment using temporary labour has become an extremely important tool which allows organizations to adapt to extreme market condition (Jeroen, 2007).ConclusionAs we observe the contingent workers are a segment that becomes more attractive for the companies. This growing interest is caused by benefits by workers to the companies, e.g. reducing labour costs, access to the specific knowledge of workforce, flexibility and possibility to choose the best candidates for permanent work. A significant growth of workers of this segment is caused by the process of implementing the set of laws which promote non-discrimination principles. The companies face challenge because the irrational usage of this type of workforce may cause negative effects and instead of increasing the performance, they may register losses. And in order to minimize these risks the companies try workforce mixing that leads to the employment of both temporary and permanent workers. We can surely add the fact that contingent workforce represents an important economic resource that may help companies to strengthen their position in the market. ReferencesAlbert C., Garca-Serrano C., Hernanz V.. 2005. Firm-provided training and temporary contracts. Spanish Economic Review Volume 7,Issue 1,pp. 67-88.Antoni, Manfred; Jahn, Elke J.; 2009. Do Changes in Regulation Affect Employment Duration in Temporary Help Agencies? Industrial and Labor Relations Review, January, v. 62, iss. 2, pp. 226-251.Autor, D. H. and Houseman, S. N. (2009). Do temporary-help jobs improve labor market outcomes for low-skilled workers? evidence from "Work First". American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, vol. 2, pp. 96-128.Bartelsman, E. J. and Hinloopen, J. (2005). Unleashing animal spirits: ICT and economic growth. In The Economics of the Digital Economy (eds. L. Soete and B. ter Weel), pp. 272-304. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar Publishing.Boeri, T. and Garibaldi, P. (2007). Two-tier reforms of employment protection legislation: a honeymoon effect. ECONOMIC JOURNAL, vol. 117, pp. 357-385.Cahuc, P., Charlot, O. and Malherbet, F. (2012). Explaining the spread of temporary jobs and its impact on labor turnover. IZA discussion paper No.6365.Cappellari, Lorenzo; Dell'Aringa, Carlo; Leonardi, Marco (2012). Temporary employment, job flows and productivity: A tale of two reforms. Discussion Paper series, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit, No. 6526, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2012081412516Cardon, M. S. (2003). Contingent labor as an enabler of entrepreneurial growth. Human Resource Management, 42(4), 357373.Dolado, J. J., Garca-Serrano, C. and Jimeno, J. F. (2002). Drawing lessons from the boom of temporary jobs in Spain. ECONOMIC JOURNAL, vol. 112, pp. F270-295.George, J. M. and Jones, G. R. (2011) Understanding and managing organizational behavior. 6 th. ed. Pearson. Heinrich, Carolyn J., Peter R. Meuser and Kenneth R. Troske. 2005. Welfare to Temporary Work: Implications for Labor Market Outcomes. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 87 (1), 154173.Ichino, A. and Riphahn, R. T. (2005). The ffect of employment protection on worker effort: a comparison of absenteeism during and after probation. Journal of the European Economic Association, vol. 3, pp. 120-143.Jeroen P.; De Jong,; Schalk, Ren; Goessling, Tobias. 2007. An Institutional Perspective on the Employment Position of Temporary Workers in the Netherlands. Relations Industrielles / Industrial Relations. Vol. 62 Issue 3, p492-515. 24p.Llobet, Joan; Fito, M. Angels. 2013. Contingent workforce, organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Intangible Capital. 2013, Vol. 9 Issue 4, p1068-1079.Martin, J.E.; Sinclair, R.R. (2007). A typology of the part-time workforce: Differences on job attitudes and turnover. Journal of Occupational Organisational Psychology, 80: 301-319.Nienhuser, Werner and Wenzel Matiasake. 2006. Effects of the Principle of Non-Discrimination on Temporary Agency Work: Compensation and Working Conditions of Temporary Agency Workers in 15 European Countries. Industrial Relations Journal, 37 (1), 6477.Riphahn, R. T. and Engellandt, A., (2005). Temporary contracts and employee effort. Labour Economics, vol. 12, pp. 281-299.Uzzi, Brian and Zoe I. Barnsness. 1998. Contingent Employment in British Establishments: Organizational Determinants of the Use of Fixed-Term Hires and Part-Time Workers. Social Forces, 76 (3), 9671005.Wasmer, E. (2006). General versus specific skills in labour markets with search frictions and firing costs. American Economic Review, vol. 96, pp.811-31.Sean A. Way, David P. Lepak, Charles H. Fay, James W. Thaker. January/February 2010. Contingent workers impact on standard employee withdrawl behaviors: does what you use them for matter? Human Resource Management, , Vol. 49, No. 1, Pp. 109 138.

9