[Some of this I had just posted on another website ...] Recruiters all over the country at citing “hard economic times” as the reason for quoting lower rates or salaries, yet …if you speak to one of their competitors, you might find that the agency or headhunter firm is taking a larger cut.

An example, I have an offer for Arkansas on C2C for $100/hr …descent rate, right? Then, a recruiter from New York City cals and offers me $55-60/hr on C2C. How can that be a realistic rate?

Along with this, there have been many articles, etc. “framing” jobseekers in this market as “undesirables” or outcasts …completely ignoring the fact that corporate budgets have been cut-back on contracts, hence releasing (not “firing” which suggests that the person was an FTE or did not satisfy job requirements), their contractors to reduce costs.

In Minnesota, for instance, the board of unemployment has taken the position that a contractor should be hired or extended by a firm (unless something is wrong with the person’s work). If the contractor does not find another job with the same agency or firm, Minnesota Unemployment indicates that the contractor “Quit” the position or company. Contractors are required to receive a form from the paying company to indicate that no further work was available. [A statement of no expectation of follow-on work is written into most W-2, 1099, and C2C contracts as a disclaimer.]

This position is contrary to the reality of contract or consulting work, especially if the contractor has taken steps to create and LLC or S-Corp and in being paid as a business.

Likewise, if a backward move is taken …after this position is over (which would be certain to re-acquire competitive salary and address expenses and rent/mortgages which were based on higher pay), the recruiters and agencies then justify lower rates and salary offers based on the previous pay, regardless of economic circumstances.

The cycle is vicious and predictable …jobseekers have to use defensive tactics because employers (like those who require privacy data through agencies before submission), then use inability to find candidates at below market rates as justification for hiring H1-B, etc. [Again, for the record, I have nothing against H1-B -- if the skills are scarce in the U.S., not becuase the company prefers to offer under market rates.]

This, says nothing of the expenses that candidates are being asked to take on, face-to-face interview(s), no benefits, business insurance — often quoted higher than needed to force the candidate from seeking C2C rates.

He said in order to really feel well financially, don’t save money that’ll last you for 6 months if you lose your job. Save at least enough to last you 2 years, if not longer.

If a client or employer has something that’s attractive outside my usual range, I tell them the Carlson advice. Then depending how blunt I want to say it, I tell them I’m not doing the job because I need the money for survival. I’m not approaching them out of need, I’m approaching them out of interest.

Afterwards, whether they see that as an advantage or not is up to them.