![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I was contacted by an agent from a local staffing agency today. I've never done work for this agency before, but I have had my resume in their system for over a year and was talking to them a bit last summer about getting work. I didn't remain persistent with them partly because I picked up a page-layout project that filled up my time for a while, but mostly because I let myself be discouraged by the general lack of available work. Well, it seems that things are finally picking up, as the agent saw my resume in their system and contacted me to ask whether I'd be interested in being contacted regularly as positions come available.
The short answer is of course simply yes. Probably my biggest flaw as a freelancer is my strong aversion to searching for work; I've always hated searching for full-time work, and now that I'm self-employed, I still hate trying to find new contacts and potential sources of projects. I'm happy to make new contacts and connections, I certainly don't shy away when opportunities present themselves, I just don't want to spend time cold-calling companies and dislike approaching potential new contacts even if we share a connection through someone else, unless that connection facilitates the introduction. Consequently, it's obvious that I should be working with an agency or agencies: let them do what they're good at, which is connecting available workers to available work, and let me do what I'm good at, which is doing the work. Even though most agencies treat their contractors as employees, meaning a lower pay rate than what I can demand on my own, they also provide employee benefits and more importantly in my case they provide the work that I don't want to find on my own, so it's clearly to my advantage.
The longer answer is more complex, though. In the past eight years, almost all of my work both as an employee and as a freelancer has been for Microsoft. That definitely gives me a strong skill set and valuable experience for continuing to work with Microsoft. However, my understanding is that most of the Microsoft contract work the agencies offer would require working full-time on campus. Having spent most of my work time from March into June commuting daily to Redmond for a 3Sharp project, I've been reminded how much I dislike the daily commute to the Eastside: it's very tiring and draining, it's expensive, and there are better things I could be doing with my time than spending a minimum 90 minutes of my day in that commute. (Yes I know plenty of people spend at least that much time commuting one-way and are grateful to have the work; that doesn't change the fact that it's a poor way to spend time.)
Furthermore, I have been getting work as a subcontractor. On the one hand, it really hasn't been sufficient to my needs, which is why I desperately need new sources. On the other hand, I can expect my current project flow to be higher in the next several months, and I've had the good fortune of gaining a new source recently, which should also help improve my situation. Unfortunately I really can't tell how much my workload is going to increase, so I have no way to know whether it will be adequate. What I do know, though, from having a full-time project this past spring, is that it's pretty difficult to be working regular full-time hours, plus commuting to the Eastside, and also to keep doing freelance work on the side, of the kind I've been doing. I just wouldn't have enough time to get the freelance work done in a timely fashion, and I also wouldn't have energy for it.
So, ideally what I'd like is to be able to get more project-based work of the kind I'm already doing—here's a document or set of documents, please edit these, done—rather than committing to some kind of long-term full-time contract with one employer, working on site, particularly if that means having to commute to the Eastside again. However, there's a strong argument to be made that I should take what I can get, because the economy's not all that improved and because I've put myself in a real financial bind in the past couple years; I really need reliable regular income at a level considerably above what I've been making. The question remains whether I can get what I need by doing what I want. (And the answer depends in part on the financial analysis I still have to do.)
The short answer is of course simply yes. Probably my biggest flaw as a freelancer is my strong aversion to searching for work; I've always hated searching for full-time work, and now that I'm self-employed, I still hate trying to find new contacts and potential sources of projects. I'm happy to make new contacts and connections, I certainly don't shy away when opportunities present themselves, I just don't want to spend time cold-calling companies and dislike approaching potential new contacts even if we share a connection through someone else, unless that connection facilitates the introduction. Consequently, it's obvious that I should be working with an agency or agencies: let them do what they're good at, which is connecting available workers to available work, and let me do what I'm good at, which is doing the work. Even though most agencies treat their contractors as employees, meaning a lower pay rate than what I can demand on my own, they also provide employee benefits and more importantly in my case they provide the work that I don't want to find on my own, so it's clearly to my advantage.
The longer answer is more complex, though. In the past eight years, almost all of my work both as an employee and as a freelancer has been for Microsoft. That definitely gives me a strong skill set and valuable experience for continuing to work with Microsoft. However, my understanding is that most of the Microsoft contract work the agencies offer would require working full-time on campus. Having spent most of my work time from March into June commuting daily to Redmond for a 3Sharp project, I've been reminded how much I dislike the daily commute to the Eastside: it's very tiring and draining, it's expensive, and there are better things I could be doing with my time than spending a minimum 90 minutes of my day in that commute. (Yes I know plenty of people spend at least that much time commuting one-way and are grateful to have the work; that doesn't change the fact that it's a poor way to spend time.)
Furthermore, I have been getting work as a subcontractor. On the one hand, it really hasn't been sufficient to my needs, which is why I desperately need new sources. On the other hand, I can expect my current project flow to be higher in the next several months, and I've had the good fortune of gaining a new source recently, which should also help improve my situation. Unfortunately I really can't tell how much my workload is going to increase, so I have no way to know whether it will be adequate. What I do know, though, from having a full-time project this past spring, is that it's pretty difficult to be working regular full-time hours, plus commuting to the Eastside, and also to keep doing freelance work on the side, of the kind I've been doing. I just wouldn't have enough time to get the freelance work done in a timely fashion, and I also wouldn't have energy for it.
So, ideally what I'd like is to be able to get more project-based work of the kind I'm already doing—here's a document or set of documents, please edit these, done—rather than committing to some kind of long-term full-time contract with one employer, working on site, particularly if that means having to commute to the Eastside again. However, there's a strong argument to be made that I should take what I can get, because the economy's not all that improved and because I've put myself in a real financial bind in the past couple years; I really need reliable regular income at a level considerably above what I've been making. The question remains whether I can get what I need by doing what I want. (And the answer depends in part on the financial analysis I still have to do.)
