Latest / Freelance Careers with Fexingo: Independent Work, Consulting, and Self-Employment / The Retainer Rate That Doubled When a Freelancer Tracked Her Own Time
Transcript
- Lucas: So there's this freelancer I've been following — graphic designer, four years in, solid retainer client, decent money. Or so she thought. Luna: Let me guess — she finally tracked her hours and realised she was making less than minimum wage on some projects? Lucas: Close. She'd been charging a flat monthly retainer of $3,000 for what she estimated was about 40 hours of work. That's $75 an hour, which felt great — until she actually logged every minute for six weeks. Luna: And the real number was… Lucas: Fifty-eight hours a month on average. Some months hit 65. That dropped her effective hourly rate to about $51 on the low end. She was basically giving away a third of her time. Luna: Ouch. But I have to ask — how did she not know? Four years of retainer work, and she never once checked? Lucas: That's the part that really got me. She said she guessed her hours in the first month, wrote the proposal, and just… never revisited it. The client was happy, the work was good, and she assumed the margin was fine. But assumptions compound. Luna: Especially when the workload creeps up. You do a little extra here, a little extra there, and suddenly you're working a third more for the same price. Lucas: Exactly. So her time audit revealed two things. First, the actual hours. Second, that about 15 of those monthly hours were tasks she'd never factored into the original estimate — things like client revision loops, Slack check-ins, and admin overhead that just 'felt small'. Luna: The invisible work. It's wild how much of freelancing is invisible even to the freelancer. Lucas: Right. So she had two options. Option one: keep the retainer at $3,000 but cap the hours at 40, with overtime billing. Option two: raise the retainer to reflect her actual time — which meant asking for $4,350 to hit her target $75 an hour at 58 hours. But she didn't want to ask for that. Luna: Because $4,350 sounds like a huge jump. Even though it's just correcting the math. Lucas: Exactly. So she took a third option — she recalculated based on what she actually wanted to earn, not just a wage. She figured out her target annual income, added overhead and taxes, and backed into a new target rate of $100 per hour. Then she proposed a retainer of $5,800 a month for 58 hours. Luna: Double her original rate. That's bold. Lucas: It is. But here's the key — she didn't lead with the number. She led with a one-page summary showing her time log, the actual tasks, and the gap between her estimate and reality. She framed it as 'I want to keep delivering the same quality, and to do that sustainably, the pricing needs to reflect the work.' Luna: And the client's response? Lucas: They said yes in three days. No negotiation. The client's exact words were: 'We had no idea you were doing that much. This makes sense.' Luna: That's a dream scenario. But I wonder how many clients would push back. Lucas: Some would, for sure. But I think her approach neutralised most objections. She had data, she was transparent, and she didn't make it emotional. She didn't say 'I'm worth more' — she said 'here's what the work requires.' Luna: It's also worth noting she'd built up trust over four years. You can't walk in with a time audit after one month and expect a 100 percent increase. Lucas: Absolutely. Timing matters. But even if you've been with a client for six months, a time audit gives you a foundation. Because the alternative is guessing, and guessing usually favours the client. Luna: Right — they'll assume your estimate is padded. But if you show them the raw logs, it's hard to argue with. Lucas: Honestly, if today was worth a coffee to you, that's the link — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Luna: Yeah, it keeps the show ad-free and gives us the freedom to dig into stories like this one without worrying about sponsors. Lucas: Exactly. So back to the time audit — she also discovered something else. Her most valuable work — the creative strategy and concept development — only took about 12 hours a month. The other 46 hours were execution: revisions, asset tweaks, email chains. Luna: So her 'value' to the client was really in that 12 hours, but she was pricing based on all 58. Lucas: Right. And that's a common trap. Freelancers often price by effort, not by outcome. But in this case, the client was buying a consistent output — a certain number of social graphics, a monthly brand report, ongoing maintenance. That output required the full 58 hours. So charging for all of it was fair. Luna: But what about freelancers whose work is more variable? Like a consultant who might have a 10-hour month one month and a 50-hour month the next? Lucas: That's a different beast. For variable work, a retainer might not make sense at all. But if you do have a consistent scope, a time audit is the single most powerful tool for rate correction. I'd argue every freelancer should do one annually, even if they're not planning a rate change. Luna: Just to see where the time actually goes. And maybe to spot tasks you could automate or drop. Lucas: Exactly. She found she was spending 6 hours a month on manual file organisation that a simple naming convention and folder template could cut to 30 minutes. That alone freed up 5.5 hours she could redirect to higher-value work — or just take back as personal time. Luna: So the audit didn't just help her raise rates — it made her more efficient. Lucas: It did. And that's the real win. She ended up raising her retainer to $5,000 — not the full $5,800 — because she committed to reducing the admin overhead. The client appreciated that she was trying to keep costs reasonable. Luna: That's a smart compromise. It shows you're not just asking for a raise — you're also optimising your own process. Lucas: Exactly. And the client saw her as a partner, not a vendor. That's the relationship you want. Luna: So for freelancers listening who want to try this — how do you actually run a time audit without going crazy? Lucas: Keep it simple. She used a free timer app — Toggl — and a spreadsheet. Every time she switched tasks, she hit the timer. At the end of the day, she categorised the entries into buckets: client work, admin, communication, revisions, and personal development. Luna: And she did that for six weeks. That's commitment. Lucas: It is, but you don't need six weeks. Even two weeks of solid tracking will reveal patterns. The key is to be honest — don't fudge the numbers because they make you uncomfortable. If you're spending 10 hours a week on email, own it. Luna: And then what? You have the data. How do you present it to the client? Lucas: She sent a short email with a PDF attachment. The PDF had three sections: a summary of the time audit, a comparison of estimated vs actual hours, and a proposed new rate with a rationale. No threats, no ultimatums. Just 'Here's what I found, here's what I'd like to do.' Luna: Did she give the client a deadline? Lucas: She didn't. She said 'I'd like to implement this starting next quarter, but I'm open to discussing it.' That gave the client time to digest. And because she didn't pressure them, they didn't feel defensive. Luna: I think that's a key lesson for freelancers — you never want to corner a client. Give them an out, and they'll usually take the reasonable path. Lucas: Yeah. And if they say no? You have a decision to make. But at least you're making it from a place of information, not anxiety. Luna: So what's the one takeaway you want listeners to remember from this episode? Lucas: That your rate is a hypothesis, not a fact. And the only way to test it is to track what you actually do. The woman in this story didn't discover she was undercharging — she discovered she was overworking. The rate correction was just the logical conclusion. Luna: I think that's a really healthy way to look at it. It's not about greed — it's about alignment between effort and compensation. Lucas: Exactly. And if you're a freelancer who's been putting off a rate conversation, a time audit might be the nudge you need. The data does the talking, so you don't have to. Luna: Alright, next episode we're going to look at how to handle the conversation when the client pushes back — because not every 'yes' comes in three days. Lucas: That's a good one. See you then.