First Choice Adult Svc

Pros

• The agency is respectable, with a friendly and accommodating administration.
• The pay is reasonable and appropriate for the type of work required.
• Administrative transitions are smooth and receptive.
• They would definitely recommend the agency to others.

Cons

• The company is accused of theft, paying only 5 hours for 80 hours worked.
• They overwork employees and deduct hours from pay even when overtime is promised.
• They don't care about their employees and have refused to issue final paychecks.
• They take hours away and promise free hours that never materialize.
• The reviews label them as a horrible staffing company and warn others not to work with them.

Review

The collection of opinions about this staffing agency presents a striking contrast between praise and criticism. On the one hand, there are voices that describe the organization as respectable, with friendly and accommodating administration, reasonable pay for the job type, and smooth, receptive transitions between assignments. One reviewer captures this sentiment in a single, laudatory line: the agency is "such a respectable agency," with administration that is "friendly and accommodating," pay that is "reasonable and appropriate for the type of work required," and transitions that are "smooth and receptive," culminating in a firm recommendation to others. In this account, the human side of the operation - the responsiveness of managers and the clarity of pay for the role - appears to align with the expectations of many workers, at least in the moment of their experience.

Yet, for every positive note, there is a sharply critical counterpoint that questions the integrity of the operation and the fairness of its compensation practices. A particularly strong accusation is that the agency is fraudulent in its pay practices: "They are thieves, you work 80 hours and they pay you for 5 hours." This stark contrast - 80 hours worked versus only 5 paid - frames a narrative of wage theft that some individuals feel defines their entire experience with the company. The intensity of this claim underscores a deep sense of betrayal and financial harm, suggesting that positive impressions of administration and organization can be overshadowed by what these workers perceive as deliberate underpayment.

Further amplifying the negative perspective is a loudly worded critique: "First choice is a HORRIBLE STAFFING COMPANY! They overwork you, promising to pay you over time and they take hours away from your check. They don't care about their employees and with me and also another lady they haven't wanted to give us our final checks! DO NOT WORK WITH THEM!" This reviewer uses capitalized emphasis to convey the extent of dissatisfaction, accusing the agency of systematically overworking staff, misrepresenting overtime pay, and deducting hours from paychecks. The allegation about withholding final checks for multiple employees intensifies the claim, portraying a pattern of behavior that goes beyond isolated payroll mistakes to something perceived as disregard for worker welfare and lawful compensation.

A briefer, single-word verdict adds to the chorus of discontent: "Sucks." While devoid of specifics, this concise assessment echoes the broader sentiment found in the longer critiques: a highly negative overall impression, likely tied to experiences of pay, hours, and treatment that did not meet expectations. When paired with the more detailed accounts, it reinforces the sense that for some workers the job experience with this agency is not merely challenging but deeply frustrating, perhaps ending with a sense of being unvalued or exploited.

Another negative note focuses on the recurrence of hour manipulation and unkept promises: "They take hours away and always promise to give you free hours if you stay but don't." The repetition of promised benefits that never materialize - free hours or otherwise - suggests a pattern of misalignment between what workers are told and what they ultimately receive. This feeds a broader narrative about trust being eroded: employees hear assurances designed to keep them onboard, only to see those assurances fail to translate into actual compensation or scheduling relief.

Taken together, these reviews sketch a complex picture. There are workers who felt respected, fairly compensated, and supported by an accommodating administrative team, and there are others who feel harmed by wage practices, overwork, and unfulfilled promises. The discrepancy raises important questions about payroll practices, overtime handling, and the consistency of final paycheck procedures. It suggests that experiences with the agency can be highly variable, depending perhaps on the particular client assignment, supervisor, or timing of payroll processing, but the most persistent themes in the negative feedback are wage discrepancies, hours being taken away, and withholding of final payments.

For anyone considering working with this staffing company, the mixed bag of experiences offers several practical considerations. It would be prudent to seek clarity on payroll policies before starting: how overtime is guaranteed, how actual hours are tracked and verified, and the precise rules around final paychecks. Request written policies or terms of employment that specify how many hours are expected, how pay is calculated for those hours, and what constitutes overtime and how it is compensated. It is also wise to keep meticulous personal records of hours worked, shifts completed, and communications about pay or schedule changes, so there is documentation if disputes arise. If concerns do surface, contacting human resources or a higher-level supervisor promptly and documenting interactions can help ensure problems are addressed in a timely manner.

In the end, the experiences described here highlight a broader truth: a staffing agency can present itself as competent and supportive in one narrative, while another worker can recount a significantly different reality marked by financial stress and perceived unfair treatment. The agency may well excel in administrative friendliness and reasonable base pay for some, but it also faces grievous accusations of wage theft, overworking staff, and withheld final checks from others. This duality underscores the importance of due diligence and transparent communication for anyone engaging with the firm, as well as the need for careful oversight of payroll practices to ensure that all workers are paid accurately and on time, in line with their rights and with clear, enforceable policies.

Pharmacies

• Walgreens (0.9 miles)
• Walgreens (1.2 miles)
• Emerald Fields Glendale Recreational Dispensary (1.8 miles)
• Walgreens (1.8 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (1.9 miles)
• Walgreens (1.9 miles)
• King Soopers Pharmacy (2.1 miles)

Parks

• Bonnie Brae Ellipse Park (1 miles)
• Washington Park (1.3 miles)
• Infinity Park (1.5 miles)
• Ash Grove Park (2 miles)
• Overland Pond Park (2.1 miles)
• Mamie D Eisenhower Park (2.2 miles)
• Ruby Park (2.3 miles)

Cafes

• Stella's Coffee House (1.1 miles)
• Starbucks (1.8 miles)
• Starbucks (1.9 miles)
• Starbucks (2.1 miles)
• Starbucks (2.3 miles)
• Aviano Coffee (2.4 miles)
• Starbucks (2.5 miles)

Restaurants

• Raising Cane's Chicken Fingers (1.2 miles)
• Bull & Bush (1.8 miles)
• McDonald's (1.8 miles)
• Flower Child (2.2 miles)
• McDonald's (2.3 miles)
• NoRth (2.3 miles)
• Cherry Cricket (2.3 miles)

Physicians

• Porter Adventist Hospital (1.4 miles)
• Cherry Creek Pediatrics (1.8 miles)
• Colorado Surgical Arts (2.8 miles)
• Rose Medical Center Medical Libr (3.4 miles)
• Center For Hearing, Speech, & Language (3.5 miles)
• Orthopedic Associates (3.5 miles)
• Children's Medical Center (4.2 miles)

Hospitals

• Cherry Creek Eye Center (1.8 miles)
• Webb Center for Primary Care (3.3 miles)
• National Jewish Health (3.8 miles)

Places of Worship

• Temple Sinai (2.9 miles)
• St John's Cathedral (3.7 miles)

Theaters

• Amc 9+Co 1 (3.1 miles)
• Regal UA Denver Pavilions 4DX & RPX (4.3 miles)