Re: Re Fair Cut

Subject: Re: Re Fair Cut
From: "Dick Margulis" <margulis -at- mail -dot- fiam -dot- net>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:34:52 -0400

Stephen -dot- MacDonald -at- Aspect -dot- com wrote:
>Well whaddya know, I find myself agreeing with Andrew Plato. "Fair cut" has
>no meaning here because the agency is not getting a cut of your money. When
>a company pays an agency $75 an hour and you get $50 of it, the client
>company is paying for two things: $50 for what you produce as a tech writer
>and $25 for the agency's work for finding you. It's as simple as that.

Well, not entirely. Part of that $25--a significant part--covers the employer contribution to FICA, unemployment insurance, worker's comp, and any benefits the contracting agency provides to the worker. Then there is the agency's rent, payroll, and other overhead. I'm sure that an agency can make good money, but please don't mistake the agency's "cut" for margin or their margin for profit.

Previous by Author: RE: Printers
Next by Author: Lowercase legibility (was Re: Date format)
Previous by Thread: Re Fair Cut
Next by Thread: RE: Re Fair Cut

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads