Hacker News Reader

Comment by tgrass | Hacker News Reader

I am seeing this request made more and more frequently by designers:

By helping to keep pricing standards high, you not only help yourself by avoiding the title of “The Poor Man’s Marian Bantjes” (essentially the creative equivalent of a knock-off handbag), you also help every other young designer struggling to get paid out there, and help every designer that came before you to continue making a living doing what they love.

Low wages here are a sign of a labor market saturated by qualified designers. Pleading with youth to raise their wages in order to protect the interests of those whose careers and income are already established is disingenuous at best, and naive at worst.

View on HN

Yes, if most young designers demanded respectable wages, it would help established designers. But to claim that that's the only motive for this kind of plea isn't fair to the people succeeding in the industry.

I recently graduated from art school. Nearly ever one of my illustration professors (all established illustrators) harped on this issue, encouraging us to demand industry-standard wages, and to turn down jobs that paid dirt.

It wasn't hard to see that they love the profession, and want to see it supported in perpetuity. By making sure that the next generation of designers continues to convince the world that illustration is an art form worth paying for, they're supporting an endeavor they love.

Call it passing the torch. That it helps them continue to earn a living is fully beside the point.

I attribute low wages to the lack of education of industry-standard rates. The author brings up a great point about the concealment of pricing amongst creatives to prevent others from knowing your annual income. How can students be expected to know how much to charge when their instructors and peers aren't inclined to speak openly about their numbers?

Without this baseline of information, young designers (myself included) fall into the trap of pricing far below market due to misinformed notions of 'this is great experience!' or 'I need to get my name out there'.

An aside: Qualified is an ambiguous term in relation to design. Expand on what you consider 'qualified' please.

I'm thinking economically: qualified in my use means that a client is willing to pay for the end product.

I think concealment is a big problem in most industries, and one of the main reasons companies try the "not allowed to discuss your salary" trick. The other one is so that people who aren't as well paid as others but think (or are) better at the same (or harder) jobs don't get fed up and either demand more or leave.

So... Ultimately talking about your salary hurts no-one honest and open. Because trying to prevent staff from being unhappy at being unfairly compensated OR having to pay a fair wage isn't either of those things.

This only encourages a race to the bottom though, which doesn't help them build viable, sustainable long-term careers. While I see where you're coming from, I do still think the advice is sound in the long term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com