Which is irrelevant to the original point. Again, the point isn't about if it is a full-time job or not, but whether or not it is fair compensation. Fair compensation isn't determined solely by the employer, according to most people's standards in developed societies since about the mid-19th century when working class people reacted to the excesses of Capitalism. 

To suggest what is "fair' is what the employer says is fair is a far-right wing view held mostly by right-wing "libertarians" and radical market liberals/neo-liberals. Attempting to normalize that position is harmful to working people. 

Its not what the employer is saying in this case. They followed the guidlines of what the union she is a part of demands. She declined and they hired someone else. End of story. Its not that difficult. Companies cant keep supporting every voice actor they hire just because they might not get other jobs. 

They didn't originally follow the American union's guidelines. They initially offered her a wage below the minimum. 

That itself should cause an uproar because members of the American union in question competed with Helenna Taylor. If Helenna accepted that low-ball offer it would harm all other VA's. Instead she negotiated, and it is only then that they offered her a minimum. 

It is as unethical as outsourcing labor to developing countries in an attempt to push up bottom lines and avoid regulations. 

The only confusing thing about this is for consumers whose interests align with the employers because they want to see more Bayonetta games. And that makes sense. But let's not pretend it isn't unethical or adopt right-wing "libertarian" talking points because it is for a product we like. Nor are the whataboutist arguments that keep occurring in this thread legitimate either.

No.

Relative to means correlated with. And those things are indeed correlated. The more value they perceive, the higher a fair price should be and vice versa. And it's hard to argue that's not the case. Unless you'd like to argue that perceived value of the service doesn't have anything to do with what a fair price should be. I would assume you wouldn't want to argue that because it would be pretty stupid, but you can surprise me if you want. 

But that doesn't mean the perceived value of the service to the employer is the only factor correlated with fairness, and it should have been pretty clear from the post that wasn't even in the ballpark of what I meant. If it wasn't, now it is.

1. You dont know how much she was offered at first

2. You dont know how many hours she would have to record

3. If they offered her less than what the union demands, then why did Helena herself say that they did nothing illegal? That it was just immoral.

You said, "Sounds like they just really did not want her to work, but would be willing to change their minds if she was able to do it much cheaper than a voice actress they think was more valuable. If that's the case, I don't really fault them."

Is the bolded an ethical and fair mechanism of employing people in your opinion, given that the other voice actress is covered by a union that has negotiated minimums equivalent to the raised offer? You seemed to think it is fine when you say, "If that's the case, I don't really fault them." But I don't know, it might be stupid of me to assume. 

1. We know it is less than $4,000. 

2. Nobody knows beforehand how many hours it would take to record. 

3. She is British, and an American union doesn't legally bind negotiations between a Japanese company and a British person. Nor does it really bind negotiations between a Japanese company and an American citizen who is not part of the union. Legal =|= ethical

1. So what if the job required 10 hours of work?

2. They do, thats why they schedule it. If it goes over, they have to pay more.

3. So what the fuck does it actually do for their clients then?

1. That is why it seems typical to negotiate an hourly rate rather than a flat one. They didn't seem to do that here. 

2. Not if the contract stipulates that she'll be paid a flat-rate regardless of how many hours it takes. As long as they are abiding by the minimum wage laws in the country she resides in, that probably won't be legally tenuous. 

3. I am not sure what you are asking here. Since most American VA's seem to be part of the SAG-AFTRA the union de-facto sets industry standards (given that most English-speaking VA's are working in the U.S) but that doesn't mean they set rates by law, and certainly doesn't mean it sets rates by law in a country that the union's membership doesn't reside in. The sleazy part here is the aim of a multi-million dollar company which is being bankrolled by a billion dollar company to get cheap labor that has already proven itself to be excellent at the job and then lying about why that person didn't take the job. 

2. Do u think she did her recordings and the offer was given to her after? And that she didn't take the money for the work she did despite her claiming she is having financial struggles? At that point I would be pissed if they didn't pay me the work I did, and it's my fault that I didn't confirm the payment contract beforehand. So likely, the offer was given before the recordings, or else she wouldn't have been quiet this whole time NDA or not. Or maybe she was paid, and she's still doing this. That will be very bad for Hellena honestly.