Know Your Value: Defying Work-for-Hire for Photographer Empowerment

As photographers it's important that you know your value. In this article I'll explain work-for-hire jobs. Plus, I'll tell you why you don't want to agree to them. Then I'll discuss when and how you might accept one. Finally, I've provided reasons why clients don't need work-for-hire. Work-for-hire is a bad deal for clients as well.

Work-for-hire is work that the client owns. In other words, you have no ownership of your work. Work-for-hire is common for employees. If you're a W2 employee, then your work is work-for-hire. Of course W2 employees use employers equipment. Plus these workers receive benefits.

Work-For-Hire Photographers

Newspapers are one example of work-for-hire photographers. At least they were. The newspaper provided equipment. Plus, photographers were given specific assignments. As a result, the photographer was paid wages and benefits by the paper.

Major Flaws in Work-For-Hire

This system had major flaws. For example, Pulitzer Prize winners don't own the winning work. Because it's work-for-hire, the newspaper owns it. In fact, the paper can still claim to be a Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper even if they fire the winning photographer.

Photographers Are Independent Contractors

Most photographers are independent contractors. Work-for-hire are employees. Too, independent contractors pay for their own insurance, equipment, and everything else needed for the job.

Ideally they have more freedom. They can do the job the way they know is best. Of course, the client will still ask for specific things. However, independent contractors retain ownership of their work.

Independent Contractors Set Their Own Prices

Ultimately, independent contractors must know their worth. Because this allows them to set their prices. If you know your worth, understand your costs, and are finding your own clients, you're an independent contractor. Therefore you should retain ownership of your work.

Gray Areas

Driving for Lyft doesn't allow you to set your prices. Too you're not marketing the service. Lyft is. As a result, it doesn't meet the definition of independent contractors. As a result, these companies are sued for benefits and wages.

However, the companies maintain that drivers are Independent Contractors. In fact, they argue that drivers use their own cars. Too, they say drivers drive only when and where they want. That said, the companies' arguments are cut down by the closed system they provide.

You Shouldn't Accept Work-For-Hire Jobs

If they want work-for hire a client should pay you a wage, benefits and providing equipment. Too they should accepting all liability for any mistakes you make. Otherwise they're not entitled to own your work.

Think about everything you need for any photography job. You need cameras, lenses, and lights. Plus a computer, software such as Lightroom. Too, you need an internet connection and place to host the client's photos. Unless the client is willing to provide all of these things don't accept a work-for-hire offer.

Photographer-Client Obligations

As photographers we have obligations to our clients. We're obligated to deliver the photos they're paying for. Also, they expect us to be insured, have needed equipment, and to keep those photos for potential future use. there are many more obligations of course. Those are the bare minimum.

Provide The Means Reap The Reward

However, no client should claim ownership. Unless they're providing everything needed to create the work they shouldn't own it.

That might sound harsh. But, the truth is corporate America created this system. They can always hire in-house photographers again. Of course, we know they won't. However, they can't have it both ways. Companies can't own the work and not pay properly for doing so.

Is the client is willing to hire you as a W2 employee? No. Then only agree to work-for-hire if they meet your conditions. Speaking with other photographers the consensus is clear. If a client wants work-for-hire, they need to pay for it.

What does an event photographer do?

My Conditions for Work-For-Hire

I on'y commit to work-for-hire under limited conditions. First, the price needs to cover the cost of the benefits they're not paying for. Plus, they need to compensate me for the loss of future use.

What do I pay for health insurance, equipment, and retirement per year? I'm not saying. However, I charge one-twelfth of that total. Employers generally pay for those benefits in monthly increments. Too, my work is worth a lot to me. Therefore, if I no longer own it I need paid a parting fee.

Before accepting work-for-hire double or even triple your rate. Every situation is different. However, if a client wants ownership of your work they need to pay for your work.

What The Experts Say

I spoke with a group of experienced professionals. Only a few of the photographers I talked with have ever been asked to do work-for-hire. That said, they all agreed on the answer: Double or triple your rate. If you're giving up ownership of your work the client needs to pay for it. To figure out what they should pay you've got to know your value.

Proper Compensation Matters

What is proper compensation? That's up to you. However, if doubling or tripling seems arbitrary here is some math to arrive at a more concrete number.

At the end of the day just remember that you're giving up all rights to the work you're doing for them. This is a big deal and they should understand that. If you help them to understand this it will help the rest of the photography community as well.

Go With The SBA's Estimate

Does the double or triple your rate idea seems high? In 2019 the SBA said that employees costs between 1.25 and 1.4 times their salary. As photographers we're well above average. That's because of the equipment costs. Therefore, if you're looking for a smaller figure how about 1.5 times your rate? I'd place that at the low end of what they'd pay if you were an employee.

How To Calculate Work-For-Hire Fees

You need to know your value. Too, you need to understand what expenses factor into the work you do. If a client want you to agree to work-for-hire then give them a rate that provides you with fair compensation.

Calculate Your Value

First, figure out what you're saving them. If they'd hired an in-house photographer what would it cost? Use the cost of your gear. They'd also pay payroll taxes, workers comp, etc. So you're saving them money. How much? If we use the SBA figure it's 1.5 times your regular rate. Let's keep going. Add in equipment and liability insurance.

Don't Underestimate

Don't sell yourself short. Remember, they're taking ownership of your work. This is a big deal. You deserve to be properly compensated.

You cannot think about a work-for-hire job like all the rest. This isn't a half-day, full day, etc. They will own your work forever. Plus it doesn't matter if you only worked that one day. They will own the photos forever.

Therefore you need to be paid fairly.

Calculating Fair Work For Hire Charges

When I run the numbers I come out with $25,000. That number is the replacement of the equipment I often use and 1.5 times my fee. Too, I've factored in my phone, internet, etc. Am I really saving them $25,000? No. That's because they'd pay a group insurance rate and what not.

What Clients Pay for Work-for-hire

Too, I don't expect that they'll pay that total figure. No client agrees to this rate. That said, I expect them to pay a large percentage of that figure to own my work. Alternatively, I expect them to agree to a lower rate without needing ownership. Remember, they don't need to own your work. They think they do. However, they don't.

Work-For-Hire Means Client Ownership

You cannot use your work created under a work-for-hire contract. At least not without permission. Therefore you need to be compensated for the cost of what you put into the job.

Your work has value, you have value as a creator. Therefore you need to be compensated.

10 Things To Know Before Starting A Photography Business

Work-for-hire is also bad for clients.

Hiring Based On Price

There are two reasons to hire one photographer over another. First, you hire a photographer purely based on price. If that's your criteria then you'll usually get what you pay for. I don't mean that in a bad way either. In fact, that's a neutral statement.

Read Why The Copyright Matters To Photographers

Hiring Based on Quality

The second reason to choose one photographer over others is their work. Looking at a photographer's work gives you a greater sense of the value they provide. When you hire based on work quality you of course expect the work they do for you to match.

Read This Before Hiring An Event Photographer

Work-for-hire removes incentives

However, work-for-hire jobs do not inspire photographers to do their best work. If the photographer cannot show off their work they have less incentive to create great photos. If you're only hiring based on the rate that might be okay. However, if you're hiring based on their work prepare to be disappointed.

Work-for-hire costs more

More photographers are becoming aware of the issues with work-for-hire jobs. This is a big reason I'm writing this article, to increase that awareness. As such, more photographers know they need to double or triple their fee before agreeing to work-for-hire.

You Don't Really Need It

The truth is that you don't really need to own the work. Every photographer is willing to sell exclusive rights. Most, if you ask, will only charge a small fee to not use the photos for self-promotion. In fact, if that limitation is limited in time, they may waive any additional fee.

Work-For-Hire Doesn't Work

What does ownership of the photos provide you? My comprehensive commercial contracts give my clients the ability to use the photographs for everything they need. The only exception in my contract is resale of the photos. If I'm photographing an event for your company is the ability to resell those images really that valuable?

I'm going to assume the answer is no.

The Legal Department Insists

With due respect to the legal department, they have no idea why they're insisting. Honestly, there is never a reason to need ownership. In fact, all the concerns about usage, privacy, etc. can be accomplished through contracting without work-for-hire.

Lawyers Love Ownership

Years ago I photographed an event for a local politician. They were a lawyer , and asked for contract changes. The first change was that no photos could be shown or sold without their permission. They were worried I might photograph an important person doing something silly or totally normal like holding an alcoholic drink.

Client Concerns

Privacy

I'm told that privacy is the concern from the legal department. However, I offer usage including unlimited use and restrictions on resale. In fact, I am willing to not use photos, even for self-promotion if there is a serious privacy concern. To do so I will charge a higher rate. However, that rate is far lower than the rate for work-for-hire photography.

The Press

The politician above didn't want me to sell photos to the local press. I explained that nobody would trust me if I sold photos of them to the press. I understood the fear but it's unfounded. In the end they loved their photos and they were in charge of who got to see them.

No Justification for Work-for-hire

If your legal department insists on a work-for-hire contract there's no justification. Any arguments are easily debunked. Too, they're costing your company more money and time without adding any value.