You don't renegotiate your contract with a billion dollar firm like Oracle or SAP.  Big firms just don't work in that way.  They have a process and you fit into it.  Frankly, thinking about it, this is true for most firms with more than 100 employees.  They give you a standard consultancy agreement and you sign it.  You're assuming business people think rationally and without emotion.  If you lowered your rates, the MOST likely thing they would do is dump you because they would figure you were working for a competitor (and double dipping) or a lunatic or planning to set up your own company.  They would be suspicious as to why anyone would lower their rates and anyone doing that would more likely be treated with contempt.

Businesses hire expensive consultants and pay CEOs and senior executives megabucks precisely because their boards and other senior management think "expensive is good", especially where there are not like-for-like comparisons or the deliverable is based on trust and trust is based on reputation.  Just like people buy Rolex watches and prestige cars.  Aston Martin does not make a cheap runabout for similar reasons.  People would not like or trust the DB9

But you aren't lowering your rates. You are keeping the same $300/hour rate, you just take less time. I cannot imagine a scenario where saying "Hey, I'll do the job for the same $300/hour of my competitor but in half the time" would reflect badly on a person's value. In fact if you ARE somehow able to negotiate the same pay for 3 months work as the other guy would in 6 months work, you are doubling your rate.

The only way that would work is if the company wants to pay X amount of dollars for X job and the details of how long it took you are irrelevant. Then the pay is based on the value of the job done and not strictly by the hour. In that case I would have no problem taking home the same pay as the other guy even if I got the job done faster. Then my pay is based on me being good at what I do and using my time efficiently rather than lying about how many hours I put in. There's no justification for claiming to work 5 days a week when only working 2.5. But if they don't care how many hours it takes and simply want the job done for X wage, then taking X dollars is perfectly fine. The bottom line then is that you are resourceful not deceitful, it makes a big difference.

The nature of most consultancy or contracting is stopping and starting, feast and famine.  If you are engaged all year every year then you are not charging enough.  The nature of capitalism is supply and demand.  One's time is a limited resource and therefore you charge what the market will bear.  The optimum pricing point will give you gaps in your schedule, just as a company lending money does not aim for or wish to get a zero default rate on loans.  What it does is OPTIMIZE its default rates with it's acceptance rates to maximize its profits.

What is wrong in principle with some of your clients paying you $70 per hour and other clients paying $100 per hour or even $140?  Provided both clients are happy with your output/product/service then why is that dishonest?  When you book a flight on a cheap airline and pay $50 for a ticket and the person sitting next to you on the flight has paid $200 have they been ripped off or treated dishonestly?  They each agreed to pay the price they paid for a service.  Perhaps the flight is more valuable to them.  Perhaps $200 is less important.

The economic REALITY is that the $200 passenger is subsidising the cost of the $50 passenger.  It costs the airline more than $50 to fly you in jet fuel alone, but as a business they have chosen to use a dynamic pricing model to sell airline travel.

Working by commission is that way too but as I understand it, with greater risk/reward work like that, you have to balance your budget accordingly. A feast shouldn't really be a feast because you are either catching up from the recent famine or preparing for the next one. If that is the reality of some types of work then they still have an obligation to live within their means which includes putting away for times of famine -- not overcharging and sticking it to the next guy. He didn't choose for you to have feast or famine work, you did. It's not an excuse to introduce dishonest practices like overcharging or overquoting. If a person can't handle the feast/famine cycle, doesn't like it or ends up in famine too much to make ends meet then they should get a different kind of job with a steady paycheck every two weeks.

Overall I don't mind people like that making a good living. They actually have to. It's a high stress kind of job and no one would take the risk if it didn't reap rewards. So it does have to pay off eventually and the feast has to make it worthwhile for them to continue. And the many, many people who aren't willing to take the risk can't grumble when those who do, reap the rewards.

But let's say someone does 2 contracts a year worth $50,000 each. They should live within the means of a $100,000/year budget. If they start overcharging so they can cover their debts from living outside their means, then there would be a problem IMO. But I'm still referring to the first example of overcharging 5 days a week when only actually working 2.5. If they are getting paid what the market is willing to pay it's fine but still not without pitfalls for a clear conscience.

I understand that what a person is willing to pay makes the job worth that much. I don't know how it works with a billion dollar entity but as an individual, my reasons for charging $70 to one client, $100 to another and $140 to another would determine whether I am being morally upright or not. If the average value of my services is about $140 and I'm charging someone $70 because I can afford to give them a break and they really need it, then I'm not in bad shape. If, however, the average value of my services is worth closer to $70 and I charge $140 because the person doesn't know any better, then I am being pretty dishonest. Yeah, they're willing to pay it but "because I can" isn't always the best reason. They should educate themselves or get a second opinion, but it still doesn't give me an excuse to prey on their weakness. If it's a company with money to burn and the guy writing the check couldn't care less that I doublecharged because it's company money and no skin off his back, I still see it as wrong because it will ripple effect down to the consumer. What people are willing to pay may guide the value of a product or service but I don't think it justifies a free for all.

That's it for now. I left it open all day but didn't get back to it very often.

As a journeyman in the construction industry, I end up at the bottom run of a complex hierarchy of contractors who sub-contract other contractors, &c., which makes me feel more like a free-lancer but more distant from the project. However, I try to make a connection with the project (usually home remodels) and with the people (even though I may not like them and they may not like me, I have to be professional and assume the best).

There are two types of guys I've met in this predicament: the minimalist sort clocks in at a certain hour in the morning and clocks out at a certain hour in the afternoon, whether the project would meet the contractors' deadline or not notwithstanding; the other sort doesn't mind leaving later in the day or having to report to the job site earlier in the morning, and goes out of his way to help the contractor finish the project even if he is not invested therein in any fiduciary or emotional manner.  

I try to be like the latter type. Not because I'm hoping for tips or anything like that, but because I feel it is my duty to help when I can help someone out, even if that someone is a contractor who is profiting way more than I am or the homeowner who may have assumed I'm getting paid more than I actually am.

There are two reasons why this would be prudent even on a naturalist level: 1) the experience and 2) the networking far outweigh any benefits from salary re-negotiation. Over and above these, is the blessing of having a job at all, and being thereby able to fulfill my duties of state. Whether my bosses or the homeowners appreciate it or not is a factor that does not matter to me. Oftentimes, they manifest gratitude and even offer me tips, but it is something like a pleasant surprise.

The best thing for me is to remain detached from the process that is above me (the relationship between contractors who hire me and the homeowners) whilst being as efficient and effective a worker as possible. The big contractor winning more profit from having me and the other guys work more, either qualitatively or quantitatively, whilst having no impact on what I get paid, is a fact that is irrelevant to me (even if the other guys do complain).

I have to know my place, and it is far better than most have to go through to make ends meet.

edit