121–130 of 424 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right but abusive and predatory behaviour is STILL abusive and predatory in an oversupply situation.
The promotional aspects could be worth much more than whatever money they'd earn.
So now you can put this on your resume:
I did this job for Netflix. And by the way, they didn't pay me a dime.
As long as safety + working conditions are not cruel and unusual, and someone is willing to work for $0, why are you trying to stop (or hide) that fact?
Someone willing to work for less (or for free) is offering a bargain to incentivize giving him/her the business or the benefit of experience instead of more $. You restricting them from doing that doesn't magically solve their problem of not having a job, you realize?
We have tons of people who are locked out of well paying jobs because they can't get on the job experience or even get in the door at the wages being required (and experience demanded by those wages). Young people, people with less education. Minorities. Did you know that? It actually causes some people's heads to explode, that the good intentions of a policy actually might hurt the people it's designed (in a very coarse way) to benefit.
This is the classic conundrum of the minimum wage. You may not realize it but you are implicitly choosing some people to benefit over others.
It's great for people who can get the job. It does nothing for those who cannot get employed, who for many industries are more numerous. It's in fact a very discriminatory regulation in outcome (although of course not in intent -- no one intends that obviously!). But intentions, as they say, are heavily overrated. Look to outcomes.
Maybe the person doing unpaid work is someone who has been overlooked by "the establishment" and is trying to break into the industry. Maybe it's a 2nd job to support the family and doesn't have to be a full wage earning job. You want to foreclose people from those possibilities and say that only full professional (say, union members) should be able to get that job?
You are not going to escape the fundamental fact that there are people who are out there wanting to work, but who cannot command the pay rate dictated. And that we have an excess of labor in many pockets in this country (really, we do!). You just hide the problem by saying that it's unjust to pay so low a wage and not allow people to do it. The people and their lives are not going away just because you mandate not to see them.
I might get downvoted for that, I still gonna say it: That might be due to the demand-supply situation in photography. They probably will find photographers doing this for the promotion effect described in the email.
Of course. Photography is one of the lowest paid professions so of course you’ll have people tripping over themselves over the opportunity. Question is should Netflix who are flush with cash be a participant to this Gladiatorial Theater? This is kind of grotesque coming from a company with very deep pockets.
The US continues to support unpaid work in a pretty major way. I think unpaid internships being socially acceptable is one of the roots of this insidious habit. They've been illegal up here in Canada for a while and it hasn't really caused any economic disasters. It'd be a good change to advocate for down there as well. And, honestly, internships aren't free for companies unless there is literally nothing of value be…
>I think unpaid internships being socially acceptable is one of the roots of this insidious habit. When I worked with interns they were all paid... but every one was more time and expense to work with than any value they provided. In weeks they accomplished what I could do in an afternoon, and we spent WAY more than an afternoon of work with them. Amazingly many seemed to have a very high opinion of their productivit…
Yes, most of the time they have negative productivity, but as an intern I had some demanding projects where our work was part of the final (revenue earning) product.
But that's how it goes. Pay people for their time.
The US continues to support unpaid work in a pretty major way. I think unpaid internships being socially acceptable is one of the roots of this insidious habit. They've been illegal up here in Canada for a while and it hasn't really caused any economic disasters. It'd be a good change to advocate for down there as well. And, honestly, internships aren't free for companies unless there is literally nothing of value be…
>I think unpaid internships being socially acceptable is one of the roots of this insidious habit. When I worked with interns they were all paid... but every one was more time and expense to work with than any value they provided. In weeks they accomplished what I could do in an afternoon, and we spent WAY more than an afternoon of work with them. Amazingly many seemed to have a very high opinion of their productivit…
For six months I worked as an intern, getting paid less than my rent. If didn't have parents that could've supported me, I would've been unemployed.
I don't work for free. You presumably don't.
Pay your interns and pay them a livable salary.
People who think this is predatory have clearly NOT worked in the TV / Film industry. Doing shit jobs for free in the hopes of getting some cred is the norm. Not right but not news. BTW just because it's going to be on Netflix doesn't mean Netflix is the employer. Netflix just buys the content. The staffing / contract decisions are made by the production company.
Hitting Page Down (in Safari) advances the frame of an advertisement in the right-hand column, rather than advancing the page itself.
If you are a designer who does this sort of thing, I hate you and hope you fall into a pool of piranhas.
I might get downvoted for that, I still gonna say it: That might be due to the demand-supply situation in photography. They probably will find photographers doing this for the promotion effect described in the email.
> They probably will find photographers doing this for the promotion effect described in the email. Almost no couple will care - unless what they produce for Love is Blind is extremely out of the ordinary - but then they won't be able to afford it. There's a very good chance the photographers will get no new business because of this.
The question is how much would you pay for this opportunity? This buys you an instant reputation.
As the article admits, they'll probably find someone to do this for free. And if someone agrees to do this for free, we'll, that's how much it costs. I'm sure they'll get their money's worth.
Just because you are able to find someone desperate enough to take up your shitty offer doesn't mean it is the fair market at work. There's a reason labor laws, OSHA, minimum wage etc. exist. This is predatory, period. The irony here is that they wouldn't be able to do this if they just wanted people to act as photographers, not actually take any photos, because the various actors unions wouldn't allow it. Even namel…
I have never heard of the concept of a "fair market" beyond what any given person considers fair on a case by case basis.
I might get downvoted for that, I still gonna say it: That might be due to the demand-supply situation in photography. They probably will find photographers doing this for the promotion effect described in the email.