Increasing use of freelancers aids business more than workers
 |
| (Image by Stock.xchng vi) |
The Trib seemed to have invested a lot in its TribLocal
venture to cover suburban news. Its hiring of reporters and editors to provide
that coverage was a hopeful sign in an industry that in recent years frequently
inspires Dante’s “Abandon all hope ye who enter” this profession. Don’t get me
wrong, I still am excited about the possibilities digital media brings to news
storytelling, but my optimism about re-entering the industry full-time has
plunged to depths I never expected when I was laid off in December 2010.
My first exposure to the Trib story came via
a Facebook post by noted media blogger Jim Romenesko. Then came one of
several email news roundups I receive each day from Crain’s
Chicago Business, in which one of the headlines promised more details of the
Tribune’s decision to outsource its local suburban reporting to Journatic LLC,
a Chicago-based company in which the Trib reportedly is invested. So I followed
the links and read.
According to Crain’s, Journatic’s
agreement with the Tribune ends its contract to provide real estate coverage to
the company that laid me off nearly 17 months ago.
Here’s the rub: Journatic
has offshore
data-journalists who electronically gather all kinds of information that is
specific to local communities, according to a Thursday post by Poynter’s
Andrew Beaujon. He interviewed Journatic founder
Brian Timpone, who told Beaujon that Journatic
seeks to automate the process of compiling
the data it gathers into stories.
He admits it’s not Pulitzer-quality material, but it is
community news, from schools to police, that the company produces at a very low
cost. That part of the company’s operation appears to me to be brilliant.
But Journatic does
need some local workers, and is hiring people like me for less than half of
what some of us were getting paid just two years ago; further, Journatic is making the same, perfectly legal
end run around our nation’s labor laws that many newspaper companies and other
corporations are doing these days.
By hiring contractors instead of full-time employees, the
employer avoids paying into Social Security and providing perks like health
insurance. Further, at least in Illinois, companies don’t have to pay unemployment
insurance for contractors. All this comes at a huge savings for employers.
But workers are left holding the bag — having to provide
their own health coverage, no longer assured of steady hours or steady income, and
lacking some of the legal protections enjoyed by full-time employees. Finally, laid-off
workers can collect unemployment benefits, as small as they are. Freelancers/contractors,
however, are restricted in that. Technically, they don’t get laid off, they
lose or end their contract.
To be fair, some freelancers I have come to know over the
years relish their independence, but many others chose that route with hopes of
getting a foot in the door toward full-time work as an employee, not as a
contractor.
As I continue to descend through what continues to be one of
the worst, most challenging periods of my life, I finding myself questioning
the state of this country. In a nation that is supposed to espouse individual
freedoms, and despite all the laws and regulations pertaining to corporate
America, why does it seem that big business ultimately gets more breaks, more
deals than the little guys do? Even labor laws seem to have lost their luster
in recent years. Is it just me, or does it seem as if we are becoming the land
of the free market and the home of the slave laborers?
The growing use of freelancers/contractors appears to me to
erode the laws geared toward protecting workers, and I do not believe that is
good for our nation.
While I can't say I totally agree with the concept, I do understand it. As you know, I went the same way- from working for a company where I was a salaried (contract) employee (with no health insurance) to getting laidtogether off from said company, to working for anothera company doingthat the sameto type of work...as an indipendant contractor. For me , with thethe previous company I was assured a regular paycheck (until they changed the contract terms last year) and the ability to claim unemployment during the summer as a 'seasonal worker'. Now, as a contractor...I have none of that, but the tradeoff is that due to the business model the owner has setup, if I work the same amount as I did before...I will make *multiple* times more money, even after paying my own expenses. I also have the ability really...to decide how much I want to work. In the end, the choice was up to me and my family. We put it before God, and felt that this was an answer to prayer.
ReplyDeleteAre there drawbacks? You bet. I have to sometimes fight a lot harder to keep my philosophy of 'mission above money'- as I am paid a percentage of the school fee, the more schools I present in, the more money I make. Whereas before, there was an office to handle a lot of issues...that's all on me now. No corporate credit/ gas/ lodging cards, no company vehicle. I understand why the company owner chose to do it this way...and I do see some potential pitfalls to it... but willing to take the risk for now- while keeping an eye on things to see if this will work long-term (ie- the next year or two).
To speak to the specific point you brought up- I suppose what will be the greatest indicator of if this works will be readership. If no one reads the stuff that this company produces, then I guess it is not 'good enough' and the Tribune will have to figure something else out.
Eric,
DeleteThe point of this post actually had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not this works for the Tribune. That is wholly irrelevant.
The entire point was that there appears to be an increasing reliance on freelance/contract workers by newspapers and elsewhere in corporate America. It amounts to an end run around federal labor laws intended to protect workers. Those same laws generally do not extend to contractors/freelancers.
Those laws came about as a result of deplorable working conditions and employers abusing laborers during the industrial revolution. Ultimately, making that end run re-opens the door to those very abuses which have been so well-documented in the history of corporate America.
We sometimes read news that indicates those corporate abuses are alive and thriving — think about raids on sweatshops and such, where authorities grab illegal immigrants, for example, who are being exploited, working in subpar conditions for illegal low wages. Then of course there are American companies exploiting cheap labor overseas.
Nothing changes, yet as a nation we appear willing to let the genie out of the bottle again.