Should companies treat independent freelance writers as their "employees"?

are those who can actually think of ways to make them work. Go ahead.

editor75 is mentally ill.

I'll take that as a compliment.

According to contract law. You can't meaningfully agree to contracts where the underlying arrangement can change. If they can decide, subjectively, to cut what they pay me based on their interpretation of the quality of the work, they can pay me nothing for my work. That's not an enforceable contract. An honest company would just not work with that freelancer anymore.

Yes, it is. If we sign a contract under which I pay you $500 for mowing my lawn, with an agreement that I will pay less if you take longer than a certain amount of time or if your lines aren't perfectly straight, that contract is entirely enforceable. Maybe you shouldn't sign it, but there's nothing illegal in the contract. The same is true for a fine system--if the writer is told up front what fines might be levied, even if one of those reasons is a subjective thing like "quality," the fines are a legal and valid part of the contract.

Except even lines being perfectly straight is somehow measurable. Quality of papers is not, unless you use the final grade which means that you know that the student is engaging in fraud. After all, many people are arguing that the subprime mortgages were unenforceable too, even though those were all about quantifiable fact, because it is absurd to sign onto a contract whose terms can change!

You are really starting to demonstrate your ignorance here, so I suggest you do a bit of reading before you keep arguing.

"Sub-prime" has nothing to do with whether or not the terms of a mortgage have changed. It has to do with the creditworthiness of the buyer. Buyers that are likely to default are "subprime" borrowers.

Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs) have existed for a very long time, are still offered by almost all major banks and lending institutions today, and are perfectly legal.

The interest rate on my private student loan (from good o' Sallie Mae) is adjustable; it is fixed to a certain amount above the prime rate (the rate that the Fed uses to loan money to member banks). If (when) the prime rate goes up, the interest rate charged on my principle balance will also increase, and this is a perfectly legal contract because I knew the rate worked this way when I agreed to take the loan.

I agree..

That's not entirely true. If the behavior is both predatory AND adjustable on the whims of one party, then it may not be enforceable. [msjlaw.org/what_we_do/predatory_mortgage.html] is one advocacy group fighting, and winning some cases, in that vein. A guest on the Colbert Report also pointed out that this might be a way to protect some people targeted by predatory loans. That's why I noted this as an argument for SUB-PRIME, not just ARMs. I've done plenty of reading on the topic: Contract law is evolving.

I'd argue that so many elements of AR/EW's contracts are legally questionable that the whole contract is likely unenforceable.

You're really an idiot and you know nothing about contract law so just stop embarassing yourself already telling other people what you think is true and that they're "ignorant." I've been through law school and did pretty well, how about you? Contracts have to express a meeting of the minds and be specific in their terms, but that has nothing to do with what you're talking about at all. Parties contract to abide by the subjective evaluation of one party about the work all the time.

If the contract says that you get paid for an essay only if the company thinks it meets its standards (or that you get paid as much as they think it's worth based on their review) and that the company's determination of essay quality is final, guess what? It's absolutely enforceable and your only choice is to sign it or find another company whose contract you like better. There's no problem with that unless their opinion is arbitrary and all they'd have to do to avoid that would be assign a letter or numerical grade to the essay and post a pay scale corresponding to those grades. Just shutup already.

But that's my point: AR IS arbitrary. There IS no letter or numerical grade, it is done entirely post hoc without cause, etc. I'm not saying there's no room in any contract for unilateral determination of compliance: Clearly, that's not the case. My point is that AR's fine structure, combined with other elements (like promising grades and potentially linking pay to grade performance despite that being suborning fraud which is illegal in many jurisdictions), probably threatens the viability of the entire contract. I'm not a lawyer so I may be wrong about the viability, but it seems to me that there would be plenty of room there to pursue action if they were to fine too extensively. On top of that, there's the simple fact that sometimes, they don't pay, is a violation of the contract and also fraudulent and criminal.

Bear in mind that terms of service that are deceptively worded, written in incomprehensible legalese, etc. can be considered to be negotiation in bad faith. (Again, this applies only to dishonest scam companies like AR, not legit companies. Many people make this point as regards EULAs too: A several hundred page EULA that most people don't read and which everyone is aware most people don't read may not be negotiating in good faith).

Also, you hypocrite, you claimed to be provoked in another thread, then decided to ask me to "shutup" (nice non-standard compound word there) when I was having an honest disagreement, right or wrong. Back off and learn to play nice.

When attempting to deny your identity, try not to repeat centralpark's exact same sentences and arguments :)


Username #2's standard `comeback.'

I know it is pointless to talk sense with you but, not all companies are alike. Many pay 40-60% depending on writer status. And, no - 70% is an impossibility as we carry overheads. When you were posting as centralpark, many listed those overheads but you dismissed them.

Why are you so envious of good writers and company owners?!
You stood alone in this argument as centralpark and are standing alone now as editor75. Doesn't that tell you something?

There doesn't have to be any specific scale; that was just a way of explaining. It actually could be arbitrary if it's in good faith. Say, a company that doesn't tell you why they "like" some work better than other work but does pay some writers whose work they "like" 100%. Even that would be OK as long as it's exercised in good faith. It's always your choice not to work that way.

Furthermore, you're even wrong about "compliance." Compliance means there has to be something objective to comply with, and it has to be disclosed. They can't say they have "compliance" criteria but apply them "unilaterally" without telling you specifically how to comply 100% and how you failed to. But they could use an editor who just evaluates by how much he "likes" or "dislikes" writing subjectively as long as it's in good faith and not a ploy to escape payment. Basically, everything you're saying is legally actionable isn't and everything you're saying isn't legally problematic is. You're just stringing together legal terms without the slightest understanding of what they mean, and being intentionally disrespectful to someone else I respect in the process. Just shutup with this already, you fool.


I don't know anything at all about AR but that had nothing to do with the nonsense of your Contracts "lesson" for Pheelyks.


You figured out that not paying on a contract is actionable without being a lawyer? That's pretty impressive, Sherlock. But it's neither fraudulent nor necessarily criminal unless they never intended to pay in the first place. Just shut up with this already, you fool.


Oh yeah? So you're saying you understand every single clause in the last lease or gym contract you signed and that if the average person wouldn't without legal help those entire contracts are null and void? Just shut up with this already, you fool.


I'm sorry. I have to be 100% honest here: I DON'T RESPECT YOU. Again, I'm sorry.

OK; it shouldn't be a problem, because for the umpteenth time, you thick-headed fool, I'm not centralpark. every time you make this dumb assumption, I'm a little more embarrassed for you.


as a whole, it tells me that centralpark is someone you're scared of, or obsessed with, and that you probably see them everywhere-- on trains, walking to the newsstand, etc. maybe you need a little vacation. who doesn't? anyway, I can't respond to past arguments you've had with centralpark.

what I can and do is say that writers in this industry do a lot more for the bottom line of these companies than they are being reimbursed for. they also have the capability to be very powerful, because these companies are nowhere without quality writers. but without organization, all we're left with is elitism and denial.

Do you even read your own sources? From the website you linked to:

"Signs of Predatory Mortgage Lending

You were told that your loan was a fixed rate mortgage, but the payments started to rise after two or three years.
You were not told the terms of your loan, and the payments turned out to be much higher than you could afford.
The loan is for a higher amount than you think your house is worth.
The interest rate on your loan is extremely high."

Except for the last point here, these are issues of DECEPTION. Yes, a contract is invalid if one of the parties to that contract FALSELY PORTRAYS the terms of the contract/an element of the purchase/etc. A loan where the rates can change, even drastically is NOT ILLEGAL unless the borrower is MISLED. That is why ARMs are still here.


Nice attempt at backpedaling, but what you said was,


clearly and explicitly equating the term "sub-prime" with ARM's. This statement is actually incorrect on its surface, however, because even in an ARM the terms of the contract don't change--the interest rate charged on a loan changes according to the concrete and immutable terms of the contract.

true-- but if you go with a company, you will unerringly find yourself working for opportunists who treat you more like a serf than an expert, and will take the lion's share of your earnings to maintain their, ahem, overhead.

you will, on average, get a CPP rate... no perks, few if any bonuses, no raises, no sick days, no opportunities for advancement, etc. the company will press you to take as many orders as you can during busy season, which will often mean 60+ hour weeks, but will not consider you a full-time employee, or offer you any approximation of scaling up pay for those extra 20 hours.

I know that changing this status quo is a logistical nightmare, but it really needs to be done. writers act like they're putting on the Ritz when they make $10 a page, and can take a nap in the afternoon if they please. it's not enough for doing 100% of the work for these companies.

if professional writers can get together, they can change the situation. without writers, these companies are nowhere. sure, they can bring in unqualified replacements... and sink their own ships, ruining their credibility and souring their word-of-mouth advertising.

if writers are able to become empowered and effective, rather than isolated and content, they could really shake things up.

The solution: Do not go with a company and take orders only from your own clients. You have 100% of the skills, expertise, and tools. Hire a marketing manager, a website designer, a PR person, a sales person, and you can kiss goodbye to all writing agencies. Pay yourself all the perks, and bonuses, have as many sick days and vacations as you want, work only a few hrs a week at $100 per page. Isn't that simple?


You get the full project specifications + the deadline before you take any order. If you take a 80-page dissertation due in 3 days then it's only your problem how much time you had to spent on it.


Without pilots airlines are grounded. In your narrow mind, pilots do 100% of the job and they should be paid 70% of all the money spent by travelers. Right?

Hi Editor, thank you for your reply. You make some interesting points throughout your post. I genuinely don't know what other writers do, I don't know anyone here and certainly haven't read all the threads (I only found this site on Sunday). My definition of freelance though, is that I choose when I work and what work I take. I don't wish to be classed as a full-time employee in truth as that would take away the facility to decline work which I didn't feel I could produce to benefit the student. Also, as I am British and subject to British taxes, if I did some work for a USA company and was classed as a full time employee, surely that would make my tax more complex rather than as a self employed individual in England?

I accept that there may be many writers who wish for the points you make in your post, but I want to be able to pick and choose the work I can do well. If I was classed as a FT employee, I would lose that facility and could be pushed into producing work way outside of my area of knowledge. That would go against my principles and would be unfair on the student who had paid for the work.

Also, just thinking aloud so to speak, if all writers were to be classed as FT employees of these companies, surely this would create a large dent in their profits and reduce writer salaries overall? The cut of these companies is what pays for their marketing, order processing, servers, salaries of office staff etc and in the UK, just the NI liability of all these extra employees would take a huge slice off that. I don't mind companies and their directors making a profit as they initially took the risk in setting up the business and carry the corporate liability for that business. All I am looking for is honest pay from an honest company.

So, whilst this may be applicable for other writers, for me personally it isn't. But I thank you for your interesting post and for taking the trouble to write it.

Polly, "editor75" is a resounding idiot who has absolutely no clue how legitimate companies operate. She's not qualified enough to write for the top, legit companies, so her only experience is with the well-known fraudsters of the industry. Review her posting history.

Polly: I agree that F/T classification is a mixed blessing at best. as you point out, it's costly for the company, and many freelancers, because of independent spirit, won't really go for it. I'm just saying, they're doing F/T work, and generally aren't treated as well as their F/T compatriots in the 9-5 world. at the same time, a lot of these compatriots spend 8 hours staring at a stapler, and clock out. writers work. if reclassification isn't the answer, I think that a professional organization with teeth, perhaps, is. if organized writers can somehow get together and enforce work stoppages during a busy season, for example, they could really improve conditions for themselves.

again, editor, you make the assumption that all writers feel they need to improve their situation. I am more than happy with mine, as is FW, Major, and the other writers that have posted in response to your ideas.

Same applies to doctors in hospitals. Oftentimes, they just rent a space in hospitals and work as independent professionals. Why hospitals don't pay them 70% of what they charge? Have you contacted pilots and doctors yet?

I get the impression that many write for 2-3 companies rather than just one, so whilst they may write FT, they are not writing FT for one particular organisation FT so I can't see how it would work in practice. Surely it is up to the individuals to improve their own conditions? Just my thoughts which relate to me personally, you're perfectly entitled to believe otherwise.

individuals have no power unless they organize into groups. pilots and doctors are doing OK, and have unions. freelance writers are as poor as church mice... although church mice are perhaps better organized.

I am not as poor as a church mouse. I make more money than most of the people I know that hold college degrees and regular, respectable office jobs. This is the fact you seem to be unable to grasp: good writers make a good living doing this.

scrambling like a madman to max out at a salary just above what those office people take for granted, doing much less (while getting, comparatively, scads of benefits)... it doesn't sound like something to be too proud of.

What did I tell you about going "full retard"?

They may have unions but only because an individual pilot or doctor cannot afford to buy and operate their own airplane or hospital.

Freelance writers have no need to have a union or any other kind of a 'professional organization' because all they need is a free email account to start working on their own.


Not only more complex. In fact, the company would have to withold about 30% of your pay as taxes of foreign employee. Living in the UK, you would never see this money or get any "benefits" (not too many benefits either way).

It seems the official goals of 'editor75' are to:

1. Organize freelance writers and make them fully dependent on their employers.

2. Make all freelance writers as poor as a church mouse (employers would pay them a minimum wage, if anything, having no ability to control them).

3. Make writers do projects they have no interest/ability/desire to work on and on schedules of their employers, not their own.

4. Kill all the benefits of working online from any country you like.

I never said this is what happened. Here are the facts of my situation:
-I make almost twice the national average salary before taxes, and a good $20,000 more than the average office worker after taxes
-I took six weeks entirely off in 2010, worked many half-days, and had complete control over when I wanted to work
-I sometimes worked twelve or more hours in a single day, and had the freedom to work as much as I wanted
-I am buying a house at a time when many can't afford to keep theirs, have already started significantly saving towards my retirement, and have a view side business ventures that I have been able to finance through careful saving

If this sounds like "scrambling like a madman" to you, OK, but I'm much happier than I would be earning less money at a 9-5 job where someone else told me what to work on, when to work on it, and how to do it.

She can't help it :)

so, here's what I've learned.

-this board is a foul place.

-there is no room for new ideas here.

-most people here would rather attack than say something constructive.

-most of the writers here have an offensively inflated sense of self-importance.

-there is a hostile and paranoid atmosphere in almost every thread.

-no one thinks anything needs changed, when it really does.

-the sky is falling.

Any response to the fact that many writers are very happy with the amount they earn and the way things currently work?

hamsters are are also "very happy" in a spinning wheel, going nowhere. that's not to say that writers are hamsters, right? right?

Yes, but the good writers in this industry aren't "going nowhere." This is the fact that you have consistently failed to respond to: I am doing much better in this job than the average American; I am buying a house, have successful investments, am able to live very comfortably and save significant amounts of my earnings--how is this comparable to a hamster on a wheel?

Independent freelance writers are not in a spinning wheel (you probably confused them with sad employees sitting in their cubicles); freelance writers are free running around in their backyards whenever, however, and anywhere they want.

the idea is that the hamster doesn't know that it

A. is in a terrarium

B. is running as hard as it can to stay in the same place

in other words, it's perfectly content within the parameters of its illusory freedom. it doesn't want any better.

And your logic is that therefore anyone that is happy is actually living in an illusion. I'm not sure where to begin pointing out the flaws that exist purely in your reasoning, let alone in your facts, but I'm going to back to earning money so I can achieve my retire-by-forty plan. You're an idiot.

You're the kid in high school who preferred to get picked on and bullied rather than receive no attention at all. It's truly sad.

you're the bully.