Idle time is part of entrepreneurship and must be included in freelancers’ rate calculations

Do clients need to pay higher rates because freelancers sometimes have periods without assignments? I’ve been thinking this through, and in my view it is fair for freelancers to include idle time (also called waiting time). Because it is a structural and unavoidable part of entrepreneurship.

This article was first published in Dutch: https://www.reclamebeeld.nl/leegloop-hoort-bij-ondernemen-en-dus-ook-in-de-zzp-tariefberekening/

Platform ACCT is the national labour market platform for the cultural and creative sector in the Netherlands. It develops Fair Pay guidelines and tools, and leads the chain-table discussions that set reference rates for freelancers. I represent freelance photographers at the Chain Table Photography. Because Platform ACCT’s models play a key role in defining what is considered a “fair” freelance rate, it is essential that they reflect real market conditions, including both actual billable hours and the unavoidable idle time freelancers face.

Idle time is often included in rate calculations within chain-table discussions and Fair Pay initiatives, but the percentages used are frequently based on assumptions that do not reflect the real conditions of a specific market. How can we speak of “fair pay” if such a crucial cost element is calculated with unrealistic figures? Waiting time is an inherent part of any realistic hourly rate and should therefore be based on actual market data, not estimates that downplay the true number of non-billable hours. It should never be negotiable, not even when market demand and supply are out of balance

Fair rates must reflect the reality of self-employment. For many years, clients from commercial companies to public institutions and the Dutch government have benefited from low freelance rates in markets where idle time is structurally present.

In this article I explain what idle time is, how it arises, and why it must be included in realistic rate calculations for freelancers.

What is idle time and how does it arise?

Idle time refers to the hours, days or weeks in which a freelancer has no billable work. During those periods you still spend time on acquisition, administration, client communication, website maintenance and other activities needed to secure future assignments. And sometimes there simply is no work available.

I’m not talking about freelancers who lack business skills or who don’t add enough value to their service. I’m talking about capable professionals, hired precisely because they are good at what they do. These entrepreneurs must earn enough on average each year to build a financial buffer for inevitable quiet periods.

Idle time can arise in different ways:

• Structural: because supply and demand are out of balans.
• Operational: because assignments are unevenly spread, or projects are delayed.

In both cases, idle time must be included in a freelancer’s rate calculation because it is time that cannot be billed but must still be financially covered. Idle time is normal and an inherent part of entrepreneurship. The amount of idle time varies by sector and the impact on rates.

Supply and demand influence idle time

In a healthy market, supply and demand are in balance: there is enough work, and freelance rates remain at a level that allows sustainable work. Idle time becomes significant in markets where supply and demand are mismatched. Some professions are simply popular, which can lead to oversupply. The fact that the Dutch government does little to regulate this is a political choice.

Idle time directly influences billable hours and therefore freelance rates. One consequence is that freelancers with high levels of idle time often accept lower rates just to stay active. That is not a personal failure; it is a structural outcome of a market that is not functioning properly. And for years, clients (including the Dutch government) have benefited from these artificially low rates.

Idle time has several sides

Flexibility is one of the major advantages of hiring freelancers, but that same flexibility comes at a price. The ability to jump in quickly or wait for the next assignment means unpaid hours. Idle time is the other side of that flexibility.

In some sectors with structural oversupply, such as journalism and the creative industries, rates have been under pressure for years.

For example, an average freelance journalist works about 37 hours per week, of which only 24 are billable. At the traditional sector rates of €30–€35 per hour, this results in a net income of just €1,500 to €1,700 per month. This is far below the Dutch full-time minimum wage, which is about €2,300 per month.

That is not a healthy market and not a sustainable working situation. And it is a direct result of idle time.

Entrepreneurship requires realistic expectations of turnover

A proper entrepreneur calculates their rate based on the reality of time, turnover and costs. A manufacturer calculates product prices based on realistic expected sales and production costs. The government does not step in to overrule that calculation with an unrealistic assumption of much higher sales. It would push prices below that what is sustainable.

Yet this is what happens at Platform ACCT’s chain tables. The theoretical model often assumes a utopian number of billable hours, unrelated to actual sector realities.

Without proper market research, Fair Pay rates will stay unrealistic

At chain tables, interests can diverge sharply. When employers are represented by lawyers, you even end up with so-called “Fair Pay” rates starting at €27 per hour.

Many chain tables have not conducted market research into sector-specific billable hours. And when research has been done, they often fall back on outdated general studies based on sectors with far more billable hours. This produces unrealistically low rates and that disadvantages freelancers.

If we want solutions that work for all markets and ensure that work truly pays then some sectors must research what realistic billable hours actually are.

Two calculations, two realities

Within the Ketentafel Fotografie, two different methods are used to determine rates and billable hours: a theoretical calculation and a calculation based on market research.

• The theoretical model is based on general policy advice and assumptions from other sectors about non-billable hours, insurance and flexibility. It results in a billable ratio of 53%.
• The practical model, based on market research among photographers, shows a different reality: photographers can on average bill only 38% of their time.

The difference is enormous. The theoretical model assumes a stable flow of assignments, a situation that simply doesn’t exist in real-world freelance photography in the Netherlands. By ignoring the actual reality of idle time and relying on outdated averages from unrelated sectors, the model creates a false picture of what freelancers need to earn.

Using a median income as a basis:

• At 38% billable hours, the required rate is roughly €102 per hour.
• At 53% billable hours, it drops to about €73 per hour.

With only 564 actual billable hours per year, that gap determines whether a photographer can make a living or not.

A fair calculation does not begin with theoretical averages or policy assumptions, but with the actual market. And the reality is this: the role of “photographer in salaried employment” has essentially disappeared from cultural institutions and many other sectors in the Netherlands. Not because the work no longer exists, but because organisations (companies, institutions and the government) have chosen for years to outsource this work to freelancers. It is cheaper, more flexible and more cost-efficient for them. That choice has consequences for freelancers.

Freelance jobs can’t be compared to salaried jobs without context

If a profession exists almost exclusively as freelance work, then comparing its rates to those of a salaried job is fundamentally unfair unless you also include all the conditions a freelancer must absorb. A freelancer has no paid downtime, no paid holidays, no employer-funded pension or insurance, no continued salary during illness, and no guarantee of a stable flow of work. They must cover all of that themselves and that requires a higher hourly rate.

So when policymakers calculate a “fair” rate for a freelance profession using assumptions based on salaried employment without including idle time and the full set of freelance responsibilities the outcome is not Fair Pay. It is a calculation that ignores the very market conditions that made the job freelance in the first place.

Ignoring idle time essentially means declaring that professions with high idle time and low billable hours no longer “count” as legitimate professions. That is not Fair Pay it’s an accounting trick.

If a profession is practiced almost exclusively by freelancers, then calculations must reflect the current reality of freelancers 100%.

For freelancers, only practice counts

A realistic freelance rate includes the hours that cannot be billed. If a freelancer fails to do this, they overestimate their income and contribute to structurally low rates by competing on price. And for years, companies, governments and institutions have benefited from that.

That policymakers at Platform ACCT ignore idle time is therefore difficult to understand. If Fair Pay is truly meant to be fair, why should freelancers not be allowed to calculate based on the reality in which they operate?

Idle time is a structural part of entrepreneurship, and it therefore belongs in every realistic rate calculation. Leaving it out creates an incomplete picture of what a fair and sustainable rate really is. The Borstlap Commission already concluded in 2020: Work must pay. But whether it truly pays still depends entirely on the sector.

Who is Wilmar Dik?

This article is an opinion piece by me, professional photographer Wilmar Dik from The Hague. I have been working as a full-time photographer since 2008 and in recent years also as a cameraman. I write about photography and entrepreneurship and advocate for the interests of photographers and freelancers. I represent the policy team of the Dutch Association of Journalists (NVJ) on behalf of NVF/photographers. On behalf of DuPho I participate in the table discussions Photography (Platform Fotografie), part of Platform ACCT’s Fair PACCT programme.
This article may only be reproduced after consultation with me.