This is the first of a sequence of posts I plan to write about people I follow on Twitter:

Would you hire a designer through a creative staffing company?  Different question: if you were a talented creative person, would you hire yourself out through a staffing agency? Or would you feel underpaid and all dirty inside?

The Urban Muse takes on the question today and writes:

Why earn $xx/hour at some staffing agency gig when I could cut out the middleman and earn almost twice as much on my own? Sure, there are certain benefits to having a staffing agency behind you (it's likely you'll get paid on time and in some cases, you might quality for health insurance), but really, you're just making money for the agency when you could be making more of it for yourself.

Not so fast, I wrote back:

I own and service staffing companies so I winced when I saw the comment about 'taking their cut' as if this were unethical and unique to staffing.

Don't agents, creative agencies, and for that matter all employers take their cut? As a premium for their risk?

It's called capitalism. Man exploits man [whereas socialism is the opposite].

Ok, the rest of your post was great, and the reasons you give for creative staffing agencies sucking more than your average agency are right on.

Some day though you too might find yourself with more work than you can handle. Start hiring and you'll see you get more than an extra hand - you get their un-supervisable, deadline-disrespecting, aching back as well.

I meant no disrespect as the UMW keeps a great blog and an equally good twitter channel.

Where do you stand on creative-staffing agencies?

Tags: Freelance, Industry, Agency Staffing, Creative Agencies, Creative Staffing, UMW, Urban Muse