An Upfront Slave Driver

The day started off like any other day: media as account services' bitch, creative services as account services' bitch, public relations as account services' bitch, interns as everyone's bitch, and everyone as Charlie's bitch. It was hard doing any real work using only excel as a tool, but we did what we could. We did media flowcharts, media reach/frequency analysis, invoices, cashflows, everything...just using excel. We didn't have any research tools. No Simmons. No Adviews. Nothing. Even the smallest of Hispanic media shops have some sort of research tool; if not Simmons, at least something else. Oh! But not us. Why pay for research tools when the client can pay extra money for the research tools that should be included in their costs already?

When I went on my first interview, being a research-junky and all, one of the first questions I asked Charlie was about (media) research tools. He blew off my question, and mentioned something about "making sure his people were well paid versus spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on media research tools." "Wow," I thought. He must really care about his people and they MUST make bank. Either way, on days like that day, I kicked my ass for believing such crock of shit. He paid me $35,000 a year to run a media department with only one media strategist and zero media tools. From what an ex-media person told me, he used to pay some of his salaried employees less that $23,000 a year, so maybe I should have considered myself lucky because I actually made a livable wage.

On our way to the media Upfronts later that day, one of the account managers named Jessica told me that someone told her that Rochelle only made $19,000 a year. "WHAT!!" I said, as we crossed the street and got into the bus that took us to the Shedd Aquarium. I asked her about it: why is he only paying Rochelle $19,000 a year? Jessica and I had previously worked together, and I had actually helped her get the job there; she is still a formidable friend of mine to this day. Jessica mentioned that she had heard that it was because he had sponsored Rochelle's H-1B work visa that Rochelle had such a low salary. Because he had sponsored her, it made sense for him to pay her less than his other employees. Much less. Since we still kept in touch with some of the people from our old agency, Alacran Communications, she told me that Paco, an ex-art director at Charlie's agency now working for Alacran Comm, told her about the similar situation he was in with Charlie a few years before. Paco, according to Jessica, at least earned a livable wage but still earned way less than his market value (maybe in the $20K - $40K range?). Paco earned Charlie's agency many awards, and if you know anything about advertising, the more awards you earn as a copywriter/art director, the more you increase in market value. Copywriters and art directors can go their whole professional lives without winning any awards, so to have multiple awards under your name is phenomenal and rare. Since he was in the states under an H-1B work visa, he had to work at Charlie's agency until he found another agency that would sponsor him in the states. Fortunately for him, that was not a problem after he won his advertising awards. But not everyone was so lucky.

Charlie's recruitment strategy involved hiring employees from other countries, mostly from South and Central America. Since these people were desperate to work in the United States and needed work sponsorship in order to do so, Charlie could easily persuade them to join his agency at (way) below market value. Unfortunately, the department that should have been the blood and lifeline of the agency, the creative department, was the very department that was the worst treated and the least appreciated by Charlie. Did Charlie under appreciate and underpay the creatives because he took for granted those people whom he helped with visa sponsorship? We'll never know, but what we do know is that he not only severely underpaid these people, but by many ethical, moral, and legal standards, he abused them as well.

I originally met Lilliana at a rock concert; she had been a media person at Charlie's agency a few years before my time. I had become great friends with one of the business administrators at work named Angela, and she took me to a rock concert at the House of Blues. Since she still kept in touch with Lilliana, we met up with her there and Angela introduced us. At first I was shy, and I just kept drinking my Amstel light beers, but after a few beers, we both started talking. As it turned out, we both had worked at Charlie's agency and had horror stories of our own to exchange. That night we became instant bloodsisters. Working for that man, as I've told other friends, is like surviving war. You will have flashbacks for the rest of your life and no matter how far you run away from it, it will always stay with you at your core. We were survivors. We lived through what we lived through, and though she was out of harm's way, I was still in the trenches. She understood my pain, and she sympathized. We were instant friends.

Lilliana told me that night that she had been an "exempt" (salaried) employee earning less than $23,000 a year salary. Upon doing some research, she realized that Charlie was breaking some of the U.S. Department of Labor laws. By law you cannot be an exempt (salaried) employee if you earn less than $23,000 a year. You can be a non-exempt salaried employee, but you must be paid for any overtime you accrue (versus an exempt salaried employee which does not receive compensation for overtime hours). The next day she sent out an email to the whole company (CC'ing Shary and Charlie), letting the fellow employees know that if they were receiving less than $23,000 a year in salaries that, by law, they either had to get compensated for the overtime hours worked, or receive at least $23,000 a year salary in order to be considered an exempt salaried employee.

Shary and Charlie were livid. According to Lilliana, they both had a stern talk with her, and she just stood her ground. Lilliana knew the strength of her legal foundation. As a consequence, Charlie had to increase the salary of those employees he wanted to keep as exempt salaried employees to at least $23,000/ year, and reduce the work hours of the rest of the employees. According to Lilliana, she was one of only three people whom didn't receive a salary increase. She was then officially converted into a non-exempt hourly employee status, and was forced to not work any overtime for the rest of her time there.

He was a slave driver. Hiring young, hopeful Hispanic individuals, and paying them ridiculous starting wages. He justified some of their low wages by stating that "they should be happy they're able to work legally in the United States, since he's doing them a favor." As for some of his other employees, he often said, "they're young. They should be glad that they've gotten off to such a great start already in my great agency."

So is this an act of charity or an act of avarice? For me it's obvious now, but I truly believe he believes his lies.