Working for a Boss, Promoting Yourself - A Question on behalf of “Anne”

adamczyk · February 8, 2009

Everyone speaks of ethics and moral issues. If Anne was 100% truthful she should have told the bridesmaid that she is only a photography student or assitant that the studio owners advertize as a second "photographer". I am sure that the owner never disclosed that information to the bride and groom at booking time. Image the suprise on their faces. Morals, truth, business ethics...ha...

jpo3136b · February 8, 2009

Well, okay, I realize my views are usually over the top, but, was there any indication that this person was taught what the policy was? One of the posters above mentioned that to not do this was one of the first things he was taught in the business. Who knows what she was taught. Did the employers even think this thing through enough to realize that they have a policy, or have they been making decisions based on their assumptions, which to an employee are just hidden and unwritten policies.

There's a bunch of stuff that we don't know, but I think that just because an employee does something wrong doesn't mean that they should be fired right away. Sure, there are some offenses which are so directly bad or dangerous that it should get you gone the same day; but, in years of being the boss in some situations, I'll tell you, Not a day goes by without someone doing something that might need some correction or adjustment, particularly if you have over a hundred people working for you. In this case, there are probably only a few people involved, so things may seem more personal; but, if you are going to get good results out of people, you have to invest in them. Some of that includes hanging in there when they screw up.

I can see that the owner of a small business would be shocked. But, face it, the difference between Dude's Hot Dog Stand and a small professional practice is a matter of strength through professional confidence and competence. Materially, both businesses could be of the same size. Which one would be the better employer would have a lot to do with the way people handle themselves, including the leaders.

You're fired, and I'm going to make sure you get a bad grade. Please. Even if you really wanted to pull the plug on the academic credit, chances are that could have been handled with a phone call to Professor Photography. Maybe a two-sentence mention in class or in the office of a better way to handle it might have been a better tactic than "You get an F, Kid!" Such a move would probably only serve to hurt the feelings of a female college sophomore. Aren't young girls who participate in these intern-type programs usually trying to show that they're willing to work a little harder? Don't they do this sort of thing because it looks good on a resume? Maybe she was there to learn something, too.

And, a bad grade might even hurt her chances at financing an education or something; well, Anne, that GPA dropped down because of this Total Failure to Achieve Anything Over at the Photography Place. What did you do while you were there? Fall asleep on the job too many times? Adios, Scholarship. And, let our collection agency contracted through your college bursar have a word with you about the rates on those student loans and grants and other monetary matters. You'll see Our Institution is not willing to finance failure. Your financial supporters are backing you up because you told them you would work hard to be successful. What is this, You got fired and got an F? Who gets fired from an internship? You must be a real bum!

You're fired and you get a bad grade. How petty. I've seen tantrums in a factory and in the fields pulled off with better results. Good luck to Anne. Probably should have just gotten a scolding; and also, some coaching and leading on how to be a better professional. That might have been why she was there in the first place.

manuel barrera houston, · February 8, 2009

You are normally fired for things like that, a no no.

mike_bisom · February 8, 2009

I am not sure I am comfortable with "this is a cutthroat business"; which leads to succeed at any cost. As a matter of fact, many seem willing to share their expertise. Sure, no margin - no mission. But if the only way I can succeed is at the expense of someone else, then I am not doing something right. I was troubled that Anne thought there was nothing wrong with what she did. I was troubled when she did it because it's a cutthroat business. It seems to me that Anne made it a cutthroat business, no? All of that said, I am not sure firing her was the right thing to do, at least based on the information presented. If Anne really enjoyed working for this studio, I might suggest writing a letter asking them to reconsider. Of course she would need to point out she now underhands the error of her ways, not just regretting what happened or the outcome. At the same time she could observe how she thought she was a valuable employee and highlight some of her contributions. And end it with no matter what the final decision, she understands and respects such decisions. In other words, take the hight road. Even if it doesn't get you what you want, you can hold your head high.

The Golden Rule!

s._d.1 · February 8, 2009

I totally agree with Mike Bisom's comment. What borders me the most is that Anne sees nothing wrong with her action, otherwise she wouldn't have sought a second opinion from William W.

Many artists seem oblivious to what is considered unprofessional in the business world. As an employee of any company, promoting your own private business while on the job is definitely a career-suicidal move, whether you are a lawyer working for a law firm, or a salesperson in a department store. This may be the most valuable experience for Anne. She may be a good photographer, but until she learns how to behave & navigate in the business world, her skills and her degree won't help her move very far.

jeremy_jones3 · February 8, 2009

Having been in a similar situation myself, I can relate to this. Let this be a lesson learned. It is DEFINITELY a bitter pill to swallow but I can assure you that life does go on. The outcome may very be "unfair" but it is what it is. Best wishes in your future endeavours, Anne.

gregf1 · February 9, 2009

You can't work for yourself and promote your yet to be built business by taking clients away from your employer, with a personal business card. Her employer should have provided her business cards if they expected her to recruit business. Also, Anne should have talk to her bosses and got rates for if she does photographer solo and negotiated a commission on any work she brought-in where it was solo or multiple photographers. This would allow Anne to build a client base within the company structure and keep her employer happy.

Clearly there is a communication gap between Anne and her bosses. Now because of that communication gap, there is an awkward situation, which usually enforces more bad communication. Anne only way out of this mess is to apologize for creating an awkward situation and negotiating for how situations will be handled in the future.

bluphoto · February 9, 2009

I feel for Anne here, and wonder if this event may have been used as an excuse to shed some headcount commitments in the light of the declining business resulting from the economic downturn.

Of course, the flipside of the coin is that some people out there are just "awkward" employees. Not saying Anne is one, but as said above, we only get one side of the story.

Had the manager PREVIOUSLY told Anne what to do in such a situation, and she did not follow his rules, then the outcome would have been disciplinary. I don't see how Anne could have known the normal protocol in such a situation and being young could only have been expected to know this by someone who assumes she has the knowledge of an experienced professional.

Bottom line is, if you don't tell an employee the "house rules", then you should expect them to cross the line once in a while - you only have yourself to blame and shouldn't punish them for that. Instead, use it as an opportunity to "pay it forward" as mentioned earlier.

Sounds to me like Anne's (ex) boss might be a decent enough photographer, but is a poor people manager. Unfortunately, the world is full of people who are good at their job, but don't realise that when they take on someone else, that job changes significantly.

dave_wilson1 · February 9, 2009

The real issue here is that the owners are insecure, don't you think???? First Anne is clearly inexperienced and the owners apparently haven't laid out clear guidelines from the beginning. Well we really don't know any of this because as already stated we are hearing this third hand. If this was someone working for me, I would help them the best I could, then again this wouldn't have happened to me because I, as the experienced one would have already set out all the details with the employee. Sorry if my opinion is sideways, I just see this differently.

William Michael · February 9, 2009

.

William Michael · February 9, 2009

I shall clarify some points, and comment on others:

“I could understand how the one partner was upset, however, I think given her status a student/assistant and her apology, I think the guy was a little overboard in his punishment. This is over-reaction, to not sign off on her practicum? That's a bit overboard.”

“I agree with the posters that who say the punishment doesn't fit the crime.”

“Given how well her time has been at the studio overall, I would have given Anne a final written warning with the understanding that if it happened again, she would be terminated.”

The Owner of the Studio withholding a Reference from Anne, will NOT impact on her hours worked for them being included as part of the credit for her degree. The studio is refusing to supply a Job Reference. They can be held to supply a Record of Service, (which Anne would use to show to future Employers) which indicates the period of time Anne was employed. Many future employers would then telephone the previous Employer for comment, as one would if an Employer was mentioned on a CV.

My opinion is the Owners' emphasis on withholding of an Employment Reference, was that they were being quite clear they would mention this particular incident if they were contacted by a future Prospective Employer of Anne, asking for any comment.

. . . This is a college kid who is probably about 19 years old or something and maybe for the first time in her life someone talked to her about her professional skills. Of course she didn't think it through! She's not some tycoon! She's a beginner! Not just in photography, but in life!

My guess is Anne is about 23. She would have left High School at 18 or 19 yrs old, she did 1 year B.Fine Arts and swapped to a 4 year B.Photog.

“And, if I follow the story right, it seems like the partner who dismissed her was the aerial photographer. Is that right?”

Essentialy yes, that is how I understand it.

“Is Anne an EMPLOYEE or INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR ? This gets into Business Law (which is basically derived from ethics).

She was a Casual Employee, (as opposed to a Permanent Employee and Part-time Employee). Which means she was be paid a wage. She was covered by the Studio’s Insurances, etc. Technically, she would be asked if she were available for each portion of work / job, and she could accept or decline, there would be no system nor cycle to the work nor should she have any expectation of that. I suspect that she would not have been “fired” as such; merely told that there was no further work available for her.

From West's Legal Environment of Business, Sixth Edition; Chapter 19; Agency, Determining Employee Status (page.461) . . .

Though similar in general structures, and useful in that regard to identify how Anne was employed Law(s) applicable in the USA, would not be applicable in this case. FYI, we do have the equivalent of ”Private Contractors”. I act as one when I do the Weddings for my Studio. I am not paid a wage; I send an invoice to the Studio and they pay, on that invoice.

Either way, it sounds like an honest (rookie) mistake.

I agree with rookie, I am unsure about “honest”.

Let's also not forget that this is only one side of the story being retold by a third party no less.

Yes, I agree that is very important. On my side, to the best of my capacity I have presented the facts unbiased and clearly designated when I was giving my opinion.

But it is important to note that my “facts” are only one side of the story, Anne’s side – If anything, I have not clouded the facts with any initial gut feel I had, after my first conversation with Anne.

“Not to mention, Anne was the "second shooter" and people were asking for her business card rather than his. It implies something about the "first shooter's" attitude when the guests and members of the wedding party would rather hire the second shooter than the business owner.

I think that was opportunity, rather than anything else. Perhaps just two young Women talking, the Wedding guy has many hours under his belt . . . well booked in advance . . . the incident happened whilst Anne’s job was to begin arranging the Bridal Party for the Formals, the Lead Photographer was finishing the Bridal Portraits.

If Anne was 100% truthful she should have told the bridesmaid that she is only a photography student or assistant that the studio owners advertize as a second "photographer".

I understand Anne was referred to as (and employed as) “Assistant Photographer”. Which is different to “Photography Assistant”. I see no issue with advertising that, as such. It is factual. I often use an Assistant Photographer - I do not refer to how much experience they have in that designation, nor do I refer to my own experience in my designation. I have been an “Assistant Photographer” also, and just recently.

I understand the point being made, but as there are not prescribed classifications as in other Trades or Professions such "Apprentice Plumber" or "Surgery Intern" . . . I think “Assistant Photographer” indicates that they are not the main guy: one can always ask about "how much experience". I think that one’s age would be a good indicator, also.

“Well, okay, I realize my views are usually over the top, but, was there any indication that this person was taught what the policy was? One of the posters above mentioned that to not do this was one of the first things he was taught in the business. Who knows what she was taught.”

Touching upon a previous comment I made, it is my opinion that some things are implicit in the Employee / Employer Relationship and could just be referred to as “rules of life”. Surely we do not need a sign or a rule for everything - perhaps we do? But the notion of the necessity for the Employer to post signs irritates me somewhat when I see instructions to staff, employed in the food industry, to wash their hands after attending to their toilet. . . umm . . . something that is a rule of life, and not just for the food industry?

“What [bothers] me the most is that Anne sees nothing wrong with her action, otherwise she wouldn't have sought a second opinion from William W.

Many artists seem oblivious to what is considered unprofessional in the business world.”

This also has been my main concern.

This, and the fact that Anne remained inactive after my conversation with her on Monday Evening.

In my conversation to Anne, the first particular point I made, was that there was an effort on her behalf to carry her business cards to her place of employment. In my view that showed some intent. In my opinion those intentions were wrong.

What I found “interesting” is that Anne did not seem to grasp, (or perhaps not want to grasp?) that issue and deal with it. It is my opinion that was one key area where she disagreed with me, and upon which she continued to juggle, during the week, and in the belief that all her actions were quite OK and which later required her to get many other opinions, than mine.

Whilst I am not suggesting everyone should agreed with my views, I suggest that as Anne sought the view of a guy, (me), who is about the same age and experience of both the studio owners – and who had owned a studio and employed staff – I would have thought she would have gleaned that MY reaction would have been similar to what she could expect from her employers?

The week mulling over this issue was wasted time. I said that to Anne on Saturday morning when she rang and asked me to post the question on Photo.net.

Further, now that it is done, I am comfortable to mention two points I have already mentioned to Anne: It seemed to me, Anne wanted to argue the toss with my opinion on Monday Evening rather than listen to it – I think that point is important.

I also think that attitude at any meeting is just as important as the words which are said, perhaps attitude even more important than the words.

If I were either of the Owners I would have gone into that meeting with a view to listen – after all it was Anne who asked for the audience. I would have had a view that what she did was wrong. Personally I have had the similar situation happen to me, twice, and both were more severe in pre- meditation. I would have not had an outcome prescribed prior to the meeting, most likely I would have not made any decision, simply because a Partner would be involved with any decision to be made, I would let it go with: “thanks for that we will confer with each other, and we will give you a call in a few hours” – or even “please wait outside, we wish to discuss this.”

As I mentioned, I do not know these two guys, only by their business and a bit of their background. Also I do not know what was said or how it was said at that Sunday Morning meeting, but it seems to me that if either of the Owners were that fired up directly after the incident, Anne would have been given her marching orders on the Saturday night, or the following Sunday morning - NOT a week later.

It seems to me the Owners were not that cranky at all . . . Why would they have given up their Sunday, a week later to meet for Coffee and a chat at 0900. If the object of that meeting was to simply give Anne the axe, I doubt that either bloke would have wasted two hours, on Sunday Morning solely for that purpose?

WW

jeff_harper3 · February 9, 2009

Most everything you have observed in your last post was clear in your original post. She did wrong and then went shopping around for someone to validate her BS.

She was fired because she was defiant, selfish, and incorrigible. Unfortunately she will start her own business, and I feel badly for her future customers and assistants.

Anne suffers from a character disorder, and the assistants that she chooses (likely she will attract those with low self-esteem) will suffer too.

I know Anne quite well, though I've never met her. Those that blame everyone that does not go along with them often can seem like the greatest people, as they often put up a great front. The Annes of the world are master manipulators, and that my friend is what you have (or had) on your hands. My condolences.

john_h.1 · February 9, 2009

Master manipulator? Seriously?

If she fit that description she would have reacted to the situation right away, would have been "handing out cards left and right" all along as contrasted earlier and would not have been fired. She is the opposite of 'master manipulator'.

Character disorder? OK Doctor Harper, Anne has lots to learn about handling responsibility and facing challenges but claims that she is bound hire people with low esteem? Come on.

jeff_harper3 · February 10, 2009

I don't mind the title Doctor as long as I get the pay that goes with it. Yes, it may seem like this was extrapolated way to far out, but we were given plenty of information to see what he was dealing with and who this person is. I admit that the term "Master Manipulator" was over the top and overly dramatic, and that projecting who her future employees will be is a bit much. Other than that, however, as I am very familiar with "Anne" and her attitude as described in the original poster's final post.

I first encountered "Anne's" behaviour in the entertainment industry 25 years ago. What I described above is simply a pattern I have seen play out more times than I care to admit, in my own businesses and in my friends. You see it in the news, it is rife in our society. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out, just experience.

People follow patterns and after enough encounters you start spotting the pattern earlier each time you encounter it. There are varaiances, of course, but none of any significance.

The first time I confronted an employee handing out his own business card was around 1986, and he was my biggest earner. "Alex" and I were on extremely good terms. He generated tons of business for me and that translated into upwards of $30K cash income per year, as the account he serviced for me paid directly out of the till on a weekly basis. I actually considered him almost a friend, though I generally did not make friends with my employees. He was possibly the most likable person I have ever met, to this day.

I learned from a third party that he had on at least one occasion handed out his business card while working for me. I was now in an extremely uncomfortable position, and while I knew I had to confront him, I really didn't want to.

I waited until he came in for a regularly scheduled meeting and brought it up in an offhand way and kept it friendly but I ended the exchanged firmly, looking him in the eye and saying, in effect "Now Alex, in the future you must never do this again. I really value you and all you do, but please don't do this anymore".

That was all it took. He clearly became angry. He simmered and the rest of the meeting was very uncomfortable, even though no more mention of the subject was made.

Our relationship went south from there. Not long thereafter attempted to steal two of my accounts, and of course I fired him.

Alex was the first in a long line of employees I have seen come and go. In these many years I have had the pleasure to work with some amazing and talented people, but there will always be those like "Alex".

Something similarly unpleasant occurred to me a few months ago. I subcontracted a talented shooter recommened by a friend (why is it always the ones with talent that are so difficult?) only to find out on site that he refused to use a tripod. Refused! It wasn't his style, he said. I pulled him aside and as nicely as I could I put a hand on his shoulder and warmly reminded him that we had already discussed in detail how I worked, and I did not want to edit around his handheld shots (we're talking video, now, BTW). In addition I wanted him to pull back and stay out of the way, as he was getting uncomfortably close to people.

He went quiet, did as he was told, but he clearly didn't like it. Ever the optimist, I told myself he was young and that since I was so gentle in my correction that it would work out. It didn't. It never does. To have maintained a relationship with him I would've had to let him do what he wanted to do and kept silent.

The attitude of an employee or subcontractor when confronted with an infraction will most always tell you what you need to know about your future with them. It also usually demonstrate their character.

"Anne's" case is no different. She was defiant. The owners took time out of their Sunday to talk with her, probably to smooth it out if she was willing to listen. Unfortunately that was not the case. Instead they had to fire her because of her attitude.

I've had plently of 17 year-old high-school interns who knew better than to do what "Anne" did. I've also corrected plenty of employees and subcontractors who were genuinely sorry for making a mistake and with whom I was able to stay on good terms with.

kiva · February 11, 2009

... and I gave her my personal Business Card. This has caused an argument between me and my two bosses. I did not go out advertising myself, but only answered the question when I was asked.

</blockquote>

You should take this as an opportunity to learn. You should have said that you are currently working for "such and such" (naming the company you are there working for). You can tell them that you can only be contacted through the company because you are working for them right now. You are showing respect.

The next step would have been to tell the person in charge at that immediate wedding that you were approached and that you referred a persons request to them as the lead photographer. Then, you could ask for permission to give the inquiring person your contact information; if you're refused then you're refused but you did the right thing and you've respected the company/photographer you're working for and you looked much more professional to the person who asked you for your contact information.

When I'm shooting I teach a second to do the very same thing; if someone comes to me and asks for information about the second photographer I'm flattered and I give them the information they want to contact them. It goes through a process like this for a good reason: it's professional and it's respecting all involved. If you disagree with the company limitations then you should not be working for them and start your own business. btw, when you start your own business it will be interesting to see how you react to those who shoot second for you if you find out they are being approached and that they are giving out contact information.

A good photographer will want to hire second photographers with a full understanding that they will want to move forward at some point: it's a good thing. By being gracious and following a respectful process it nurtures "networking" and building of relationships so that you are able to channel clients to other photographers when you have wedding dates filled or don't have time. It's a good thing!

kiva · February 11, 2009

Just spent time browsing the thread top to bottom: so my final comment is:

Anne, move forward ... the fact that they let you go means you have talent!

Use your energy to start building your own business; it may take a while and you've learned how you will want to treat people who work for you in the future. Life is Good: Move Forward, lesson learned.

This is a blip; what's important is how you now end up dealing with this type of situation when you are the admired main photographer who has an up and coming second shooter. Are you advocating and promoting that person or are you going to keep them under your thumb?

It's all a matter of thinking of this as developing talent and networking. Sometimes you may find that you have to let a person go but you'll most likely make a lot of talented people successful and create long lasting friendships ... you've got a golden opportunity here. Just move forward and smile; the fact that you "worried" about this issue shows you have the right stuff.

jeff_harper3 · February 12, 2009

"... the fact that they let you go means you have talent!"

Sure. Her talent got her fired, not her attitude. Interesting viewpoint.

darrengold · February 12, 2009

Anne started the process of going it alone by handing out her own business cards whilst emplyed by another.

She states. “it is different now, business is far more cut-throat and it is really difficult to get ahead, especially with the economy and all the competition out there”.

Ain't that the truth. By her own admission I'm sure she now fully understands why they fired her. Now she's free to really go it alone.

imagineitkc · February 13, 2009

Ok, so Anne lets pick up the pieces and move on. What now? You have to graduate... If you are as good as it seems you should be, you can go talk with the head photography professor and the chair of the art department. Don't complain or whine just tell them that you made a mistake and that you need some help on what to do. They should know that you worked that studio for almost a year if not more. Helping you graduate is apart of your professors job. Not that they are accountable for your actions but they may help you out and approve all the work you have done. I would bet that your professor is more accomplished than the people you formerly worked for. Honestly, if you are an over achiever at school as it seems you are in the studio then you will have know problem getting help and resolution.

I don't know where you are located or what you would need to do but I teach and also help students. I would be willing to help if you need it. Here is my contact info and website.

Erin Hernandez-Reisner erin@imagineitkc.com www.imagineitkc.com

imagineitkc · February 13, 2009

"no" not "Know" :)

William Michael · February 13, 2009

"They should know that you worked that studio for almost a year if not more. Helping you graduate is apart of your professors job. Not that they are accountable for your actions but they may help you out and approve all the work you have done."

>>>Feb 09, 2009; 02:30 p.m.

"The Owner of the Studio withholding a Reference from Anne, will NOT impact on her hours worked for them being included as part of the credit for her degree. The studio is refusing to supply a Job Reference. They can be held to supply a Record of Service, (which Anne would use to show to future Employers) which indicates the period of time Anne was employed. Many future employers would then telephone the previous Employer for comment, as one would if an Employer was mentioned on a CV.

My opinion is the Owners' emphasis on withholding of an Employment Reference, was that they were being quite clear they would mention this particular incident if they were contacted by a future Prospective Employer of Anne, asking for any comment."

***

It is a long thread, easily glossed over.

WW

ron_szabo · February 14, 2009

Anne should ask herself "what would I do if the roles were reversed"? She is fortunate to be paid for gaining experience/learning. I shot with the best photographer in my area (for nothing) and there is no way I would contemplate doing what she did! It was an honour to be able to shoot with this brilliant photographer.

Anne should learn that photography has a very good network and word gets around.

So really Anne you burned yourself....live and learn from this lesson. What you did could have some more consequences in the future for your career.

Finally, there is a great deal of difference in being the second shooter compared to being the primary shooter, doing it solo.

Cheers

Ron

steve_hovland · April 5, 2009

I do computer consulting as my main line.

My contracts with agencies say that if I find another opportunity with a customer they brought me into, then I am obligated to bring the opportunity to them, and I do.

I also hustle on my own, and in that case I dispose of new clients as I choose.

In this case, on site, the lead should have gone to the primary photographer.

Sign In

Working for a Boss, Promoting Yourself - A Question on behalf of “Anne”

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in