Hi Rhondalynn, The way I read it is your hourly rate needs to cover the amount of time you spend on non-billable stuff. Just like the hourly rate your Lawyer charges has to pay for the receptionist even thou they aren't directly billing you the receptionists hours.
So you don't work 400 hours on a project and bill the client 600 hours, you only bill 400 hours. But your hourly rate better cover the the time you will be spending on financial management, marketing, etc... in the other 200 hours. Cheers, Anthony Richardson On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Rhondalynn Korolak <[email protected]>wrote: > On what basis does it make sense for someone to bill out their > non-billable hours? In most professions like law, accounting, architecture > etc. this is actually illegal. If it's non-billable, this practice could > open up the developer to potential legal issues. To bill someone at an > hourly rate, you have to have the paperwork to prove that you did the work. > > > On Thursday, 12 July 2012 17:35:39 UTC+10, Ashley P wrote: > >> Hey Guys, >> >> I really agree with below and it depends on your % of billable hours. But >> guys! You should be billing for nearly all your non-billable hours! You >> worked for it so send the bill! Quotes excepted. >> >> In regards to the non-freelance space this is my calculations for >> full-time contracts. >> >> Hourly rate X 1840 = Annual package including superannuation >> >> How do I get 1840? 8 hours a day by 230 days a year (230 days is worked >> out as 52 weeks a year times 5 work days minus 30 days off for sick and >> annual leave) >> >> A contractor typically earns 20-25% more than a permanent employee. This >> is to compensate for the risk, time spent bidding for work and effort >> involved in chatting to pesky recruiters like myself :). >> >> But don't be too overly weary for recruiters :) We aren't all bad! We >> spend a lot of time matching people up with the best opportunities rather >> than in a non-open market where businesses can just screw their employees. >> Like yourselves we spend a lot of time on non-billable activities that fall >> through :(. >> >> I'm on linkedIn if you'd like to keep in touch.* **Ashley >> Pettit<http://au.linkedin.com/in/aspettit> >> * >> >> >> On Wednesday, 9 November 2011 16:45:00 UTC+11, Nicholas Faiz wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've been watching job boards for Ruby related contracts lately and have >>> noticed some low rates being offered with high expectations. It's happening >>> frequently enough that I wanted to post my understanding of how to >>> calculate an hourly rate. Setting *reasonable* standards of pay for the >>> appropriate level of expertise is vital. There's a lot to say on the >>> matter, so I've tried to be brief. >>> >>> For some reason it's very easy for software developers to match their >>> experience and knowledge to a full-time rate, but for contracting there is >>> less awareness. >>> >>> The difference between full-time employment and self employment. >>> >>> Employers gain certain benefits from contractors. On a financial level, >>> they have less commitment, which means they do not have to pay for sick, >>> parental and annual leave, training, redundancy payouts (for redundancy see >>> http://www.netlawman.com.au/**info/retrenchment-and-**redundancy-australia.php >>> >>> <http://www.netlawman.com.au/info/retrenchment-and-redundancy-australia.php>) >>> or superannuation (at least 9% of base income). To hire someone on a >>> full-time basis is a serious commitment for an employer, and if the >>> relationship isn't successful they cannot simply end the agreement (see >>> unfair dismissal laws - >>> http://www.fairwork.gov.au/**resources/fact-sheets/**conditions-of-employment/**Pages/termination-of-**employment-fact-sheet.aspx >>> >>> <http://www.fairwork.gov.au/resources/fact-sheets/conditions-of-employment/Pages/termination-of-employment-fact-sheet.aspx>). >>> >>> So, employers can take project risks, using contractors, to build a >>> profitable application, without the consequences of supporting long-term >>> staff. If they (read large corporations especially here) had to commit to >>> long-term employment responsibilities before their endeavours became >>> profitable it would be prohibitive to start them. Good contractors are >>> essential for ventures hoping to build a profitable application and it's a >>> typical scenario that applications are initially built with contractors and >>> then, when mature, transition to full-time internal staff. >>> >>> Expertise. >>> >>> In addition, there's expertise to consider. Contractors are often experts >>> (or aspiring ones) in their domains. Full-time staff might specialise on a >>> particular use of a technology *and* the business. Contractors are expected >>> to specialise in the technology, and to bring new perspectives and >>> expertise to inhouse practices. So, these sorts of contractors also enrich >>> the development habits of their employer by showing them new ways to solve >>> problems which their own employees haven't had time to research. >>> >>> Remember, if these things don't happen, the agreement between the >>> contractor and the employer can quickly end. >>> >>> The basic rate. >>> >>> The rough calculation is your expected annual income, at a full-time rate >>> (including super, paid leave, etc.), divided by 1000. For e.g., for $75,000 >>> pa (including a super payment, holiday pay, potential sick leave cover, >>> etc.), the matching hourly rate is $75 (GST not included). This sort of >>> package would like be advertised at somewhere like 62k with benefits >>> attached, if converted to a full-time role. >>> >>> If you pull out a calculator and multiply the number of working weeks in >>> the year by the number of working hours (46 x 40) then times that by the >>> hourly rate, you'll find that this adds up to 138k. This seems to be >>> excessive of the targeted 75k income. But that's okay, for two reasons. >>> >>> 1) The employer hasn't hired you for 46 weeks in the year. >>> 2) If you are able to bounce between short-term contracts continually, then >>> that's a good thing, but the employer's agreement with you doesn't >>> guarantee this and it can't be used as a justification to lower the rate. >>> The reality is, in the contracting scene, there are sometimes gaps in >>> employment for upskilling (open source coding, etc.), rest, or securing the >>> next role. >>> >>> This rate leaves to one side the notion of expertise. If you're an >>> exceptional candidate, for whatever reason, or if the technology you >>> specialise in has a rarer skillet, or is in high demand, then these rates >>> can adjust to such things. The reality is that Ruby and the frameworks >>> around it are an in demand skillset, so if anything the rates should go >>> higher. >>> >>> So, beware of contractual roles which are, in reality, heavily benefitting >>> a company or (more than likely, a middle man agent), and offering >>> incommensurate rates for skillsets. Support the employers that do offer >>> fair rates by doing good work. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Nicholas >>> >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rails-oceania/-/BdGr3AHv_FcJ. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
