Jenni Rodda wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Nov 1996, kocanda wrote:
> > personally, i've experienced it as a routine matter to be hired as a
> > "consultant" or "temporary employee" so that my employers would not have
> > to pay _any_ benefits, ever!.  unfortunately that's par for the course
> > in this line of work.
>
> An interesting point, since it again parallels academia:  many once-
> tenure-track positions (with reasonable, if not exemplary, salaries,
> benefits, and security) are now divided up among a group of instructors
> or adjuncts who are paid by the course, and have no benefits.

i have heard of a husband and wife who offered to do the work of a
single intructor's position as a team at the rate of a single employee.
they got the job, and the university got two for the price of one...  of
course there must have been many angry colleagues running around...

>
> It has been my personal experience in the museum field, however, that
> "consultants," at least, do better than "temporary" employees.  At
> one museum at which I worked, the consultants were paid quite a good
> deal more than the in-house staff, precisely because they argued that
> they were picking up the cost of their own benefits.  Indeed, one of
> the benefits of consulting is, supposedly, that you can write your
> own ticket (including salary).

this _should_ be true in all cases.  alas, the first time, i was young
and stupid and didn't get much of anything.  i was a consultant in title
only simply becuase "they" wanted to save money and new "they" could do
it... but, i did get _experience_ (on a few different levels) out of the
deal.

BTW, it's not the health benefits that get you in consulting.  it's the
social security payments.

kjk