Would you provide your services for free in this situation?

Hello togs! This is my first post!

I was interviewed for a position selling advertising spaces for a small magazine in my area.
The owner, who interviewed me, knows I am a wedding photographer and mentioned during our interview how (at certain events I must attend for PR) I "would be able to take great pictures!". I just kind of nodded as to not say "wait, will I be compensated?"

I don't want to be rude but at the same time I don't want to be used as a free photographer considering my main role is to sell ads. They currently have a photographer who they pay to photograph events, and knowing the owner, I can see something like me becoming that photographer but without extra pay, happening.

How would you approach this situation?
Thank you so much for your advice!

If he puts 'take event photography' in your job role, and this is your part time job, then you should do it. However, you should use that as negotiation when you discuss compensation.

I have worked in a cubicle job for the past 10+ years, with photography being my 'side' job. There have only been a handful of times where I've let my cubicle employer utilize my photography skills. The first few times it happened, it opened up some opportunities for me that would have otherwise been handed to my coworkers, and I volunteered the photography as I already had my gear with me (long story). A few other times, they have actively asked me how much I would charge as they were looking to hire an outside photographer, and compensated me instead of an outside vendor.

If your main responsibility is to sell advertising, and the secondary request (taking photos) would take away from that main responsibility, then you should focus on the main responsibility. I'm sure your employer would be happier if you sold one more ad vs. if you came back with some cool photos and fewer sold ads.

No.

If you do all the work (including post processing) on company time, then sure. If they expect you to do any of the work on your own time, then no.

It depends on the employment contract and how you are being paid.

Every employment contract I have ever signed has included the job description I was being hired for and has also included "additional tasks as requested." Compensation has usually been hourly, but occasionally salary with no OT pay (the company owns me 24-hours a day, essentially).

In each case (salary and hourly), I have been asked to take photographs (construction/scouting purposes for domestic oil & gas exploration). It is an "additional task" which is accounted for under my employment contract, gets me out of the office, and I get paid for it as a normal part of my compensation agreement (maybe it is regular hourly pay, maybe OT pay, or maybe weekend work done under salary).

But, my employer MUST provide the tools I need to take those photographs: the camera equipment I will be using, a company truck and gas card, and a per diem (if I'm going to be on the road a while) for meals/hotels if required. Kilometre reimbursement and a company gas card are required if the use of my own truck is necessary due to a shortage of company trucks.

Note that I'll will use my own truck if required, but not my own camera equipment. There is no "standard" compensation for the use of camera equipment in my industry. Chainsaws, quads, trucks, GPS, and survey equipment? Yes. Cameras? No. In addition to the unknown compensation factors for camera equipment, the use of my own equipment could be used (by me) to try to muddy the copyright ownership waters if I was so inclined. Note: the copyright issue is the one I use to convince employers to invest in their own camera equipment . . . it has worked every time. Their employee, their equipment, their photos. The waters are pretty clear.

Don't do work that you aren't compensated for. No good will come of it. You might think that if you do you'll get "brownie points," but you won't. You might get a pat on the back, and then you'll be asked to do bunch more things without appropriate compensation: because you made it clear to them that you're a push-over who they can exploit. It won't make you more valuable to them. Everyone is replaceable. Be aware of what your employer can request of you based on your employment contract. Don't refuse to do things that your employer can request of you based on your employment contract (unless you have really legitimate safety concerns, or the like), and don't let your ego be your enemy (I've seen this more times than I can count when it comes to "additional tasks," it just gets people fired).

There may be some things that complicate the issue a bit for you. How would you be paid in this position? Is this a commission only position? What are your professional goals here? Would taking photos with your own gear help you sell more advertising spaces and better be able to reach your goals? Do you stand to realistically benefit from taking photos with your own gear at these events? Remember, "brownie points" are not a realistic benefit.

There are lots of things to think about and consider.

JacobPhoto wrote in post #18020842
If your main responsibility is to sell advertising, and the secondary request (taking photos) would take away from that main responsibility, then you should focus on the main responsibility. I'm sure your employer would be happier if you sold one more ad vs. if you came back with some cool photos and fewer sold ads.

Good point, especially if you're paid a commission on sales.

Hi Neacail, I really appreciate your thorough response, I can tell you put a lot of thought into it.

To answer your questions... to be honest, even my soon to be Boss does not know what my role could morph into, if it was to change from pure sales to added roles.... I'll explain: this is a very popular magazine but with few employees, most wearing multiple hats, or at least that's the kind of a message Boss tried to get across during the interview. Although this may explain what Boss could have really meant: I know someone who started working there a year ago, and his role kind of shifted from selling ads mostly, to helping plan events and with ad design much more, thus less ad selling (although he continues to get commission from a accounts that were given to him to keep a steady income for him, as well as those accounts he gained on his own initially--that's his income and he's happy). My friend basically enjoyed working on events more than selling (and boss noticed he wasn't so good at selling). So basically, this place is flexible with its employees, especially because a lot needs to be done by few people.

I want to be a team player, but my friend does say that Boss can get a little carried away sometimes, and, although he may not mean to, can give you more work than what's reasonable sometimes. He's really high energy with a "go go go" personality. My friend advised me to not be afraid to say "I can't" when I sense he's exited and getting carried away.

For me, it looks like I will be doing sales mostly, and thus mostly if not all compensation will be commission from those sales (miles will be compensated too)... our interview was quite long because in a way we were brainstorming about what roles I could take on, but a sales person is what he's really looking for. If I took on other roles, he would probably gift me more client accounts to profit from.

I don't think my photography business would benefit much from doing photography for the magazine (not my market). On the other hand he suggested I could offer clients to take photos for their ads "for $200 let's say, and I keep $100" (his own words). I'm ok with that, but it's the frequent community events and activities they are involved with that concern me. I'm basically shy to say "you need to pay me if you expect me to take photos at events" before I even sign the paperwork (he said I start Tuesday).

I will be doing part time with the magazine and part time wedding photography. I will probably stay with the magazine a year and a half or two until my finacee graduates from grad school. I want to gain sales and maybe even marketing experience while here.... Thank you.

Personally, I think that you're the only one that can make the call of whether this is a good or bad thing, depending on your personal circumstances.

Your thread reminded me of a recent experience..I shot a menu for an NFL team that's used in the stadium suites. I worked with a graphic designer from the team's in-house marketing department. In the course of the project we had the opportunity to talk about a lot of things, and it turned out that he was an amateur photographer, having studied a little in art school.

When the team found out about his interest they asked if he'd be interested in shooting the games from the sidelines, and he took the offer as he's as much a football fan as he is a photographer. For every home game, he's on the sidelines with an all-access pass and shoots away creating images that he later uses in the teams marketing material. He's traveled to 2 Superbowls with the same all-access and he really enjoys his time doing this. Some might think that he's being taken advantage of but he doesn't feel that way which imo, is all that really counts.

Best of luck with however you choose to handle this-

From an employer's point of view, if you are a salesman you will remain a salesman unless you fall short of expectations or sell like a mad man. Then you will be a former or superstar salesman.

If you do well in multiple roles and still meet sales expectations you will have much more flexibility and could become a key person in the enterprise.

Foodguy wrote in post #18021973
Personally, I think that you're the only one that can make the call of whether this is a good or bad thing, depending on your personal circumstances.

Your thread reminded me of a recent experience..I shot a menu for an NFL team that's used in the stadium suites. I worked with a graphic designer from the team's in-house marketing department. In the course of the project we had the opportunity to talk about a lot of things, and it turned out that he was an amateur photographer, having studied a little in art school.

When the team found out about his interest they asked if he'd be interested in shooting the games from the sidelines, and he took the offer as he's as much a football fan as he is a photographer. For every home game, he's on the sidelines with an all-access pass and shoots away creating images that he later uses in the teams marketing material. He's traveled to 2 Superbowls with the same all-access and he really enjoys his time doing this. Some might think that he's being taken advantage of but he doesn't feel that way which imo, is all that really counts.

Best of luck with however you choose to handle this-

I think that sometimes people forget that you don't always have to be payed in cash. There are other things that may benefit you just as much. This example sounds just like one of those situations. This would be the same as if I worked somewhere that could offer me all access passes for airshows. Would I consider providing images in return for that, in a heartbeat I would. There would be a good probability that I would be paying for ordinary tickets for the event if the offer hadn't been made. I agree that working for "credit" or "exposure" is probably a bad idea. Trading them for access to something that you would otherwise be paying a lot for, if you could even pay for that level of access, is a completely different thing. This is a situation where both sides have traded something of value to the other. It is only when the perceived value of one side is much greater than the value on the other side that there could be any consideration of unfairness.

Alan

if the position is commission only? no, wouldn't take pics.

if the position is base plus commission? probably would take pics.

BigAl007 wrote in post #18022512
I think that sometimes people forget that you don't always have to be payed in cash. There are other things that may benefit you just as much. This example sounds just like one of those situations. This would be the same as if I worked somewhere that could offer me all access passes for airshows. Would I consider providing images in return for that, in a heartbeat I would. There would be a good probability that I would be paying for ordinary tickets for the event if the offer hadn't been made. I agree that working for "credit" or "exposure" is probably a bad idea. Trading them for access to something that you would otherwise be paying a lot for, if you could even pay for that level of access, is a completely different thing. This is a situation where both sides have traded something of value to the other. It is only when the perceived value of one side is much greater than the value on the other side that there could be any consideration of unfairness.

Alan

Bingo. Being a guy who can provide sales AND some event photography may get you sent to more prestigious events, or better events where there are better potential advertisers available. The key is to understand where to draw the line between the photography goals and the sales goals.

Re the scenario where you shoot the ad photo for $200 and your commission on the photo is 50%, make sure that is formalized in writing. Such statements get forgotten when it's time to pony up the cash. Otherwise, it sounds like they want someone invested in the success of the magazine. Small staff often implies greater opportunity if the magazine grows and if you want it.