3 ms·

Why does anyone allow their labor to be resold at such a high profit to someone else? If someone will pay £400/day for your services then you ought to receive t

by gnu8 13y ago

Why does anyone allow their labor to be resold at such a high profit to someone else? If someone will pay £400/day for your services then you ought to receive the bulk of that yourself.

rmcastil 13y ago
True. But for a lot of people they don't want to manage the additional overhead. Sure at £400/day could roughly equate to £100,000/yr but that's as optimistic as you can get (assuming you work 5 days a week and only take two weeks off a year). The reality could be much less if you take into account sick days and days you just were not able to sell. Some people would rather just have a sure bet even if its much less than they could potentially take home if they were on their own.
timthorn 13y ago
Job security? Don't want to do sales? Comfort?
swombat 13y ago
Because nobody would have hired me for £400/day at the time, since I had no experience. The cachet of "Accenture" was what allowed them to sell me at that price. Without Accenture, I would not even have been considered for that role. It's more true than it seems. The client I first worked at was UBS. While I was in Switzerland, I actually applied for a role at UBS - they rejected me outright. Accenture hired me, and then sold me to UBS for probably 5x what UBS would have paid if they'd hired me. Whilst I felt a bit used in this, I do recognise that most of that 5x premium was due to Accenture's brand, nothing to do with my skills or experience.
- Silhouette 13y ago
  Of course, this is an excellent example of why the British government should do more of what it keeps saying it will, and what the contractors' and small businesses' representative bodies keep arguing for: use smaller businesses or individual contractors for jobs that can readily be done on those scales, and consequently have far less red tape, pay far less money, and probably get results at least as good as anything you'll get from a professional government sponge-soaker like the big consultancies. It's about time governments stopped using big name consultancies primarily because of their name rather than any measurable benefit, and paying (apparently) a 400% premium for the privilege. That money comes from taxpayers and doesn't even go to the skilled people actually doing the useful work. This probably ranks alongside laughing at anyone who defends excessive compensation and bonuses for for senior management, investment banking staff, and the like, on the basis that they need to pay competitive salaries, all while those staff are actually making decisions that result in huge losses to their employers. It is never necessary to pay the market rate for incompetence.

by gnu8 13y ago

Why does anyone allow their labor to be resold at such a high profit to someone else? If someone will pay £400/day for your services then you ought to receive the bulk of that yourself.

rmcastil 13y ago

True. But for a lot of people they don't want to manage the additional overhead. Sure at £400/day could roughly equate to £100,000/yr but that's as optimistic as you can get (assuming you work 5 days a week and only take two weeks off a year). The reality could be much less if you take into account sick days and days you just were not able to sell. Some people would rather just have a sure bet even if its much less than they could potentially take home if they were on their own.

timthorn 13y ago

Job security? Don't want to do sales? Comfort?

swombat 13y ago

Because nobody would have hired me for £400/day at the time, since I had no experience. The cachet of "Accenture" was what allowed them to sell me at that price. Without Accenture, I would not even have been considered for that role. It's more true than it seems. The client I first worked at was UBS. While I was in Switzerland, I actually applied for a role at UBS - they rejected me outright. Accenture hired me, and then sold me to UBS for probably 5x what UBS would have paid if they'd hired me. Whilst I felt a bit used in this, I do recognise that most of that 5x premium was due to Accenture's brand, nothing to do with my skills or experience.

Silhouette 13y ago
Of course, this is an excellent example of why the British government should do more of what it keeps saying it will, and what the contractors' and small businesses' representative bodies keep arguing for: use smaller businesses or individual contractors for jobs that can readily be done on those scales, and consequently have far less red tape, pay far less money, and probably get results at least as good as anything you'll get from a professional government sponge-soaker like the big consultancies. It's about time governments stopped using big name consultancies primarily because of their name rather than any measurable benefit, and paying (apparently) a 400% premium for the privilege. That money comes from taxpayers and doesn't even go to the skilled people actually doing the useful work. This probably ranks alongside laughing at anyone who defends excessive compensation and bonuses for for senior management, investment banking staff, and the like, on the basis that they need to pay competitive salaries, all while those staff are actually making decisions that result in huge losses to their employers. It is never necessary to pay the market rate for incompetence.