Where to draw the line

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #16789269
Have them purchase equipment for you (gear could be a write off for them) or in the very least give you credit on each and every piece. If not, say no.

I don't get the first part of your statement. If they purchase it and they keep it who really cares? I would rather use my own equipment that I am familiar with. If you mean purchase it and give it to the OP that would still be income to the OP and be taxable.

I'm not saying that he HAS to quit, or he runs the risk of being fired. What I am saying is employment is a two way street. One challenge an employer faces is finding talented employees that can make them money. The more money you can make for an employer the more valuable you are to them. If an employer knew they were at risk of losing a proven money maker, they would/should be concerned. Now, because they hired a photographer, the OP MAY no longer be as valuable to them as he was before.

Think of it this way, let's say I am lucky enough to find a very talented retoucher who makes me a lot of money, then find out they are also very good at accounting, so I ask them to handle a lot of my accounting duties rather than having to hire someone else to do it. I give them no additional compensation and no recognition. If at some point my talented retoucher, explaining the additional value they are adding to my bottom line, asks for additional compensation, or at least some kind of recognition and I refuse, I should know that I risk, at some point, of losing my talented retoucher. It's a business tightrope that both sides walk. Life is full of decisions.

Hey, if it is part of your work day and you'd otherwise be reconciling yet another bank account, I'd see it as an opportunity to get out of of the office for a while. I'd let the company pick up your sundry items like storage cards, editing software (are you doing that part at home on your own time), and lunch. If the shots are on your own time, I'd politely decline future work because you are going to be busy making money with your camera or something to the effect.

A non-profit should at least be able to issue you a tax receipt for your donation (photography).

I already have the small things. And, yes, I am editing at home on my personal time. The shoot can/will be scheduled during regular business hours, so getting paid for that isn't a big deal. It's the after work time and use of my gear that bothers me - especially since credit will be given. Obviously, I could take a vacation day, get my regular pay and bill them for the time spent but that option has been wiped off the table to my understanding.

Are you looking at a full day of editing for these shoots? Will they allow you to just work from home for one day to get the editing done?

i_am_cdn wrote in post #16790150
Until you have a simple conversation with your employer, you are likely getting worked up over what could happen. I speak from experience, as I was at one point in the same boat as you.

I work for a very large company (1B+ annual revenue) they have entire advertising and marketing department. We use multiple ad agencies and they are always hiring different photographers for projects.

Occasionally I would be asked to shoot an event, because that event had no budget. I helped out when I could, and people liked my work. Photos would be used in internal communications and a couple times in externals. My hope was to build some good will to get other paid work from the company. Well that really didn't happen, they just kept asking for me to work for free. Now I did do the work on Company time, I got my salary, but I was using my own gear.

Finally one day they asked me to do a shoot, and I decided to explain the situation to them. I let them know I am happy to help represent our Company in the best light possible by providing them with great photos at these events, and my boss has been supportive of giving me the time to do so, but the time needed to do this work outside of work hours does affect my time with my family, and I am now doing photography as a business, as such, I really need to start charging.

Low and behold, the answer was, "I understand, we don't have a lot of budget, but let me see what I can do." sure enough they were able to offer me compensation for my work, and they have paid me for a few additional shoot since. I don't get many shoot with them, because they have specific photographers they use. That said, when they do need work from me, I do get paid.

The point is, just ask. and like anything else in business be respectful, and let them know what is bothering you about it and see what they say. If they tell you to suck it up and it is your job, then get them to provide you with the necessary gear. (maybe your camera is in the shop for repairs) *wink*.

Hope this helps

Very, very good post. This is exactly what I would do.

Fernando wrote in post #16789892
Sorry, you're usually dead on but in this case you're wrong. North Carolina is an at-will state. As long as they aren't violating any federal laws in the firing, they can do as they wish. As long as they pay him for the hours he's working, including overtime if it comes into play, the employer decides what is or is not his job.

If it's a union shop (extremely unlikely for a non-profit) then all bets are off and everything is governed by the CBA.

I was in a similar position some years ago and I simply told them I was not going to shoot for free. Everything was fine until they used one of my images for a marketing piece. At that point we called that a "bonus" and I got paid for that work.

I'm still "dead on" because requiring a person to work without pay is one of those illegal things they can't fire you for refusing to do. And so far, OP has not been paid and has worked off the clock. So far it has been voluntary, which is not illegal, but if he says he won't do it anymore, they can't force him to under threat of job loss. They also can't force him to use his own equipment on company time.

If he's compensated, then yeah. But we wouldn't be having this discussion because OP wouldn't have started the thread.

cdifoto wrote in post #16790793
.......requiring a person to work without pay is one of those illegal things they can't fire you for refusing to do. .....

Unfortunately that's not totally correct. Many professions (mine included) are oftentimes expected to do whatever it takes to get a job/project/assignment finished on time, or to come in on a weekend to get a production line up and running, etc. etc. Since we're 'white collar' professionals we're generally exempt from protections offered by labor laws. Additionally, if you're in a "right to work" state (meaning employer can fire for whatever reason - funny semantics there huh?) you have even less recourse.

In any case, yes, if nothing else the OP should talk to his employer and reach an understanding about doing photo editing during normal working hours.

You are getting paid to take the pictures via your salary, I'd just ask for paid time off to edit the photos. If you still feel unloved, just tell them you don't want to do it anymore.

groundloop wrote in post #16790826
Unfortunately that's not totally correct. Many professions (mine included) are oftentimes expected to do whatever it takes to get a job/project/assignment finished on time, or to come in on a weekend to get a production line up and running, etc. etc. Since we're 'white collar' professionals we're generally exempt from protections offered by labor laws. Additionally, if you're in a "right to work" state (meaning employer can fire for whatever reason - funny semantics there huh?) you have even less recourse.

In any case, yes, if nothing else the OP should talk to his employer and reach an understanding about doing photo editing during normal working hours.

If you're salaried then you have a job description and salary supposedly covers that extra time. If you're hourly you have to be paid for all hours.

It's not white vs blue collar.

Sure they can fire you, but you can raise legal hell and win. No court will side with an employer who is demanding an accountant to use his personal photography equipment for a job that he wasn't hired to do.

Not many employers are stupid enough to press the issue.

Of course this assumes OP wants to take a hard line and would be the last resort. Simply discussing it rationally with the employer should be adequate.

cdifoto wrote in post #16790988
If you're salaried then you have a job description and salary supposedly covers that extra time. If you're hourly you have to be paid for all hours.

Certainly. Since the OP said he's a CPA I'm making the assumption that he's salaried.

groundloop wrote in post #16791091
Certainly. Since the OP said he's a CPA I'm making the assumption that he's salaried.

He might be, but that doesn't mean the company can tack on photography and say his salary covers it. He's a salaried CPA, not a salaried photographer.

If a company can have someone do whatever they want them to do whenever they want, they would salary anyone and have them go clean the bathrooms, maintain the vehicle fleet, empty all the trash cans, fix the lights, and so on and so forth endlessly.

They don't, because they can't. Not because they wouldn't...especially a sleazy non-profit.

No extra pay, shoot during work hours, no time off to edit. Going to discuss credits tomorrow. If that's a no, then I'll make them hire someone.

Is it a registered charity? Can you get a tax receipt?