Reply
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply

Connects and Memberships Live

Community Guru
Preston H Member Since: Nov 24, 2014
21 of 207

re: "oDesk you need to refund all connects when client fails to hire."

This is true.
In fact, I think there have announcements about this being the updated plan, but it's timing renders it inconsequential. ODesk actually should return the connects back to job applicants when a job closes without hiring anybody, no matter how long ago the job was applied to. This should be done without reference to the expiration of connects or the monthly calendar. If a job doesn't hire, the connects go back to contractors even if it means the contractor will have more than sixty connects.

Community Manager
Garnor M Community Manager Member Since: Oct 29, 2014
22 of 207

Hi Preston,

If a job is cancelled without hiring (by the client or oDesk), the Connects used on that application will be returned for you to reuse. At this time we do not have plans to return Connects simply because a client doesn't hire. We'll keep an eye on this, but it is not part of our plans at this time.

Community Guru
Preston H Member Since: Nov 24, 2014
23 of 207

Kudos for providing this explanation and clarification.

 

I'm sure that many folks at oDesk will be watching closely over the next few weeks to see how things work out.

 

I'm sure there are many people who would like the idea of connects being returned to the contractors if a job is officially cancelled OR if a job never hires.

 

But now I understand that this is not the current plan.

Community Guru
Ian David John E Member Since: Feb 17, 2015
24 of 207

This may sound sharp but its true!

 

Just because its not in the oDesk plan does not make it right.....

Community Guru
Preston H Member Since: Nov 24, 2014
25 of 207

I don't understand why some people say contractors will lose money using the new connects system. That is just factually incorrect.

The only way somebody could lose money is if they were using the Premium plan, and that is completely optional, and unnecessary for most contractors.

Community Guru
Ian David John E Member Since: Feb 17, 2015
26 of 207

Hi Preston,

I just wanted a level playing field!

I know i will have to buy connects for sure!

So this is why i an fighting for paid connects to be returned on non hiring clients.

 

Its the right and fair thing to do....

Community Leader
Bob H Member Since: Feb 18, 2009
27 of 207

Preston, let me explain to you how I will lose money.  Because of the field I'm in I have to apply to a lot of jobs.  Unfortunatley there are no stats, but I will GUARANTEE I apply for more the 60 jobs a month.  

Hence, fewer applications, fewer hires.  Fewer hires, less money.

 

TADA!!!!   It's magic.  I just lost money!

Thank you, thank you....please, try the veal....two shows on Saturday....tip your servers....good night!

 

BOO oDesk.

Ace Contributor
Andy G Member Since: Apr 2, 2015
28 of 207

Factually incorrect?  Are you paid by oDesk?  Technically you're right but who pitches for a job and wins each one outright?  Certainly not in the design and creative sector.

 

It costs 2 connects to apply for a contract in my experience... You get 60 connects so that's roughly one application per day, and what happens after that?

 

Oh! That's right, we the skilled worker who already pays 10% and $1 per transfer of cash to paypal will now have to buy extra connects at $1 a pop!! So that's $2 per contract. 

 

I'm pretty shocked at the aggressive path oDesk has taken toward monetisation on a per application basis. It's OK for their managers and bosses sat in an office or boardroom making decisions when they have a monthly salary with security, but asking for someone to pay $1 for the chance to win a contract is pretty harsh when it's hard enough to win a contract worth any decent sum in the first place.  To start with it's a game of numbers and you have to take on some of the more unsavoury contracts to get a decent rating and to populate your portfolio .

 

I'm sure oDesk have a server full of statistics which predict that this way of doing business will make it more competitive for individuals like me but I beg to differ. There will still be countless unscrupulous chancers who request a block of work for $5 and there will be those that can scrape together a living for that price, but for those of us in countries where the cost of living is far greater it's a strong reason not to use oDesk.

 

It would make much more sense to charge $20 per month for premium member who can apply for as many contracts as they wish, this would stop 'copy and paste' DOS type applications that would sort the wheat from the chaff and ultimately improve the quality of work on offer to those seeking skilled workers.

 

But knowing the way big business works it's a game of numbers, why have the best service when you can exploit millions of low paid workers who will part with $1 as a chance to 'win' work?

 

No doubt I'll continue to use oDesk but the $10 I paid for a roll over of connects is laughable, as If I'm going to have anything left to roll over.

 

 

Active Member
A. S Member Since: Jun 22, 2015
29 of 207

Of course, and that is obvious, but the point here is not that someone who posted a job is obligated to hire someone for that job. The point is that if the job vacancy is not filled after certain amount of time,  Upwork can give back to applying freelancers the connects used for that application.

Community Manager
Garnor M Community Manager Member Since: Oct 29, 2014
30 of 207

Hi Ian,

As we've discussed before, freelancers do have the option of subscribing to a free membership plan, so you will not be "losing money applying for jobs." I know you feel strongly about this implementation, as you've stated previously. You may want to consider using the free membership plan until you can see the results and impact this new system has on your business and ability to win more jobs, an ability we expect to improve with few lower quality applications in the marketplace.

TOP SOLUTION AUTHORS
TOP KUDOED MEMBERS