I’ve actually worked for the same agency you’re referring to, so I want to give some first-hand perspective. The people running it were kind and respectful, but working under that model meant giving up autonomy over my rates and services and fitting myself into a box to meet demand. It required high volume and a lot of energy, and at the end of the day I walked away with considerably less than what I earn independently now.
That is the core issue. Agencies are not necessarily harmful, but the structure forces attendants to conform to a consumer-driven, volume-based model that undervalues individual providers. It becomes transactional and mechanical, not because the agency sets out to make it that way, but because the system pushes it there.
Yes, some people prefer the convenience of having everything handled for them and that’s fair, but it comes at the cost of independence and long-term sustainability. Your comment actually proves why the industry needs better infrastructure, not more agencies: safer and more transparent advertising options, better education on screening and safety, and spaces where people can set their own limits, rates, and standards.
I’m fortunate now to be able to operate independently, even outside my main city, because I learned and found resources. I share that info whenever I can because I think the future of this work should empower providers rather than keep them boxed in by a third party.