8
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 May 2025
8 points (83.3% liked)
Personal Finance
5723 readers
5 users here now
Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!
Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Those are all true, and I'll add one more: many times contractors have specific expertise that warrants higher pay.
The part I can't reconcile basically relates to long-term contracts. I have one client who has been paying me for as much time as I can give them for about four years. On an hourly basis, I probably cost them 80% more than the fully-burdened labor cost of an equivalent W2 hire (including taxes and benefits and overhead). Or in other words, for the ~20-25 hours/week I do work for them, they could have someone working 40 hours a week instead. In this case, your second and third points aren't really a factor, so I'm banking the extra as a "risk premium." They seem happy to pay it.
In a rational and efficient market (myths, I know), they would have hired a full-time W2 person to do the work I've been doing, long ago. And I don't really get why they haven't.
There are some companies with so much overhead with regards to hiring people that it is much quicker to just approve a consultant, and the cost/benefit analysis takes this into account. Sometimes it is because project dollars and employee dollars come out of different buckets, with different approval chains. There may be more money in the project budget with a simpler approval process, making it easier to contract than to hire.
Regardless, internally they have a budget for each job you do. It may be simpler for them to simply approve each job as they come, even at a premium, then to fight to get more headcount approved. Theoretically this also gives them the opportunity to cut you on each job, but if you are that awesome they'll keep signing you up.
(And in some dysfunctional companies, headcount is directly related to management authority, so it can be easier politically to spend more on a consultant than to fight to figure out which manager gets to become more important by having another direct report.)