Re: Fair Cut

Subject: Re: Fair Cut
From: "Sella Rush" <sellar -at- mail -dot- apptechsys -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 17:54:04 -0700

Andrew, are you like, deliberately missing the point of Emily's situation?
You're spouting standard W-2 agency representation, which most reputable
tech writers acknowledge as valid (even if they choose not to buy into it),
but which is *not* what Emily is talking about.

It's quite obvious from several of her posts that, as a 1099er, she has
taken on *all* the responsibilities and risks that an agency takes on for
its W-2 employees. And the agency is letting her while still expecting to be
compensated as if they were taking the risks. The agency is quite literally
doing nothing but cashing one check and cutting another. They didn't find
the job, they didn't negotiate a rate, nothing.

She has a valid complaint. You have a valid response, it just doesn't
happen to be applicable here.

Jeez.

Sella Rush
mailto:sellar -at- apptechsys -dot- com
Applied Technical Systems (ATS)
Silverdale, Washington
Developers of the CCM Database
Demo: www.apptechsys.com/demo





Previous by Author: Re: Recruiters (addendum)
Next by Author: Re: National Writer's Union (way too long)
Previous by Thread: Re: Fair Cut
Next by Thread: Re: Fair Cut


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads