[Ipg-smz] New Job Question: Trial Period to Full Time Staffer

Fri Nov 1 19:05:16 UTC 2019

Well done. So much teeth-gnashing happens when we don’t talk things out.

Former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss suggests relying on “calibrated questions” like “How can I do that?” to further not only difficult negotiations but also communications in general.

Glad this is working out.

Joe

________________________________
From: Ipg-smz <ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org> on behalf of Liam Kelly via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org>
Sent: Friday, November 1, 2019 1:08:26 PM
To: Mitch Wagner <mitch at mitchwagner.com>
Cc: Liam Kelly <ljkelly1888 at gmail.com>; Richard Santalesa <rsantalesa at outlook.com>; Liam Kelly via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org>
Subject: Re: [Ipg-smz] New Job Question: Trial Period to Full Time Staffer

The naive point is the real kicker. I spoke with the editor yesterday and explained my irks. He quickly acquiesced and explained that I could all my clients until a contract was on the table.

He added that he hadn't thought of it like that. I now suspect he has never been a freelancer...

So, hopefully, I'll some lovely news to report within a month. Fingers crossed.

On Fri, Nov 1, 2019, 17:54 Mitch Wagner <mitch at mitchwagner.com<mailto:mitch at mitchwagner.com>> wrote:
Rich phrases this very well.

They're asking for something above and beyond a normal freelance relationship. You'll be taking an immediate hit from loss of that month's income. And you're risking a bigger hit from a permanent loss of external clients.

The immediate hit can be fixed by means of the one client paying you a monthly rate equivalent to what ALL your existing clients pay. However, in today's market, I doubt any editorial client would be willing to do that.

And the long-term hit may be unresolvable by any means other than full-time employment.

The editor at the crypto/blockchain publication may simply be naive, in which case a conversation might result in a fair agreement. OTOH, he may be a jerk, in which case, well, I guess you're better off knowing that sooner rather than later. :)

FWIW, when I was freelancing, whenever I heard, "We can pay you X for this project but if it works out we'll have LOTS of work for you in the future," I always ignored the promise of potential future work, and just looked at whether the individiual project is worthwhile.

--

Mitch Wagner<http://mitchwagner.com/about/>

On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 9:04 AM Richard Santalesa via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>> wrote:

Good luck, Liam. What they’re asking for is essentially an option… and options aren’t free. Everyone pays for those in every other course of business and life… so they shouldn’t get it for free, especially since it’s 100% asymmetrical… they putatively get any benefit and you get nothing above and beyond what you would get anyway… a job…. If you got extra cash then they’re be “consideration” on each side, but otherwise, frankly, it’s not even a contract IMHO.

And seconding Joe’s point, there’s no cognizable damages to them from your “breach” and so nothing a court could realistically address…

Richard Santalesa, Esq.* CIPP-US

O: (203) 292-0667 M: (917) 345-8675
rsantalesa at smartedgelawgroup.com<mailto:rsantalesa at smartedgelawgroup.com>
* Admitted in NY, CT & DC

IMPORTANT NOTICE -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT & WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES.
The information in this email (and any attachments hereto) is confidential and may be protected by legal privileges and work product immunities.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disseminate the information. Receipt by those other than the intended recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney-client or work product privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by replying to this email and please permanently delete the original and any copies or printouts. Although this email and attachments, if any, are believed to be free of any virus or other malware that might affect any computer system which receives it, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the author of the e-mail., the SmartedgeLaw Group, Smartedge LLC,  or subsidiaries or affiliates either jointly or severally, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.

From: Ipg-smz [mailto:ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org>] On Behalf Of Liam Kelly via Ipg-smz
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2019 12:22 PM
To: ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>
Cc: Liam Kelly
Subject: Re: [Ipg-smz] New Job Question: Trial Period to Full Time Staffer

Thanks all for the suggestions.

Looks like I'll take a firmer stance (Beyonce/Fuck 'em position) despite how attractive the full time position appears.

Writers with teeth certainly eat better than those without.

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 16:55 Todd R. Weiss via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>> wrote:

I'm with Joe.

When they finally hire you and you know it is going to work out for YOU, that's when you can stop writing for others.

Unless these guys want to pay you what you would have made in a month to make up for your lost revenue, why should you lose the revenue?

If they don't know your work and your writing now, what's a month with no freelance work going to tell them?

After several layoffs over the years, sometimes one just has to look out for one's self.

No one else appears to be looking out for any of us nowadays.

Good luck, man.

Todd :)

Todd R. Weiss

Technology Journalist

Contributor:

www.ChannelFutures.com<http://www.channelfutures.com/>

www.ChannelPartnersOnline.com<http://www.ChannelPartnersOnline.com>

www.eWEEK.com<http://www.eWEEK.com>

Formerly with eWEEK.com and Computerworld.com

TechManTalking

717-806-5932 office
717-413-9630 cell

toddrweiss at gmail.com<mailto:toddrweiss at gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 11:47 AM Joe Stanganelli via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>> wrote:

It sounds like you’ve answered your own question. You’re being asked to take enormous risk.

Absent some form of legal agreement (whether in the form of an official contract, or in the form of some email back and forth indicating such an agreement or that your trial period is expressly contingent on such an agreement), what the trial-period folks don’t know can’t hurt ‘em.

And, from a beyond-legal standpoint: If you “violate” this editor’s expectations and continue writing willy-nilly for all your other clients while still engaging in the “trial period”, what’s the worst that they are going to do to you? What are their enumerable damages? Are they going to sue you or send you a bill? What will their claim be? These are real questions to consider. And if the answer is “They’re not gonna do jackshit”, then that kind of answers the bigger question, now, don’t it?

The “trial period” nonsense has long been a way for writing clients to screw over freelance writers in varying shapes and forms. t seems like you have little incentive to abide by the requested forbearance.

tl;dr: Fuck ‘em.

 From: Ipg-smz <ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org>> on behalf of Liam Kelly via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2019 11:13:37 AM
To: ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org> <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>>
Cc: Liam Kelly <ljkelly1888 at gmail.com<mailto:ljkelly1888 at gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [Ipg-smz] New Job Question: Trial Period to Full Time Staffer

It would be tricky. I doubt that I would still have a job there after a month of not working.

I'm just imagining the situation in which I tell the vendors that I can't work there anymore because conflict-of-interest stuff, and then a month later come back looking for my old job.

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 16:08 Sharon Fisher via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>> wrote:

Can you compromise? Can you agree to not write for vendors during the trial period?

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 8:59 AM Liam Kelly via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>> wrote:

Ah yes, how could I forget!

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 3:55 PM Mitch Wagner <mitch at mitchwagner.com<mailto:mitch at mitchwagner.com>> wrote:

Seems to me that Beyonce has the best advice here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m1EFMoRFvY

--

Mitch Wagner<http://mitchwagner.com/about/>

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 7:42 AM Joe Stanganelli via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>> wrote:

(IAAL, but this is NOT legal advice. This is “If I was in this situation, here’s what I would do.” I am not your lawyer; you are not my client. I owe you no duties and I am not to be trusted.)

If the editor has merely said “stop writing for these other pubs” but there is not an actual agreement to stop writing for these pubs, fuck ‘em. Say nothing and write for whomever you want. You are still freelance.

If they are asking you to agree to stop writing for other pubs, tell them to go fuck themselves because that’s not how the world works.

And, either way, I’d be seriously suspicious of doing any business with these fuckwads moving forward.

I am in a similar situation with a long-time client whose new-ish editor has expressed the expectation that I tell him if I’m writing for other security sites and that I’m not supposed to. I said nothing because I was so stunned to hear such bullshit. And I write for whomever I want.

tl;dr: Fuck these fucks.

Joe

________________________________

From: Ipg-smz <ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz-bounces at netpress.org>> on behalf of Liam Kelly via Ipg-smz <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2019 10:12:01 AM
To: ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org> <ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:ipg-smz at netpress.org>>
Cc: Liam Kelly <ljkelly1888 at gmail.com<mailto:ljkelly1888 at gmail.com>>
Subject: [Ipg-smz] New Job Question: Trial Period to Full Time Staffer

Hi all,

I've been speaking with a crypto/blockchain publication this week about coming on board to help with their coverage. I will be paid on a per article basis during a one month "trial period," after which, if all goes well, I'll be offered a full-time position.

Now, I also write copy for some crypto/blockchain companies at current. One company is a startup in the space, whereas the other is a PR firm that represents other crypto companies (among other subjects).

The editor has stated that I need to stop writing for these companies before beginning the trial period. I understand his reasoning (i.e. conflict of interest), but it seems risky.

What happens if I cut ties with a chunk of high paying work only to see the full-time staff position get passed on to someone else? I should add that the staff position will likely make up for the loss of marketing work financially, and I have no problem dropping the latter once I've signed a contract to work full-time for this publication.

It is indeed tricky, and I thought members of the group would have some good ideas/counter-proposals. What's a win-win for all parties in this situation?

Thanks in advance,

Liam

--
Ipg-smz mailing list
Ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:Ipg-smz at netpress.org>
http://netpress.org/mailman/listinfo/ipg-smz_netpress.org

--
Ipg-smz mailing list
Ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:Ipg-smz at netpress.org>
http://netpress.org/mailman/listinfo/ipg-smz_netpress.org

--
Ipg-smz mailing list
Ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:Ipg-smz at netpress.org>
http://netpress.org/mailman/listinfo/ipg-smz_netpress.org

--
Ipg-smz mailing list
Ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:Ipg-smz at netpress.org>
http://netpress.org/mailman/listinfo/ipg-smz_netpress.org

--
Ipg-smz mailing list
Ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:Ipg-smz at netpress.org>
http://netpress.org/mailman/listinfo/ipg-smz_netpress.org

--
Ipg-smz mailing list
Ipg-smz at netpress.org<mailto:Ipg-smz at netpress.org>
http://netpress.org/mailman/listinfo/ipg-smz_netpress.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://netpress.org/pipermail/ipg-smz_netpress.org/attachments/20191101/9582e9ad/attachment-0001.html>