Disputing hours for writer who stole content - Page 2

ace4b5a4 · ‎03-19-2018

We have a writer who we've paid for the past few weeks to write content for us. On wrapping up the project, we discovered that this person has been copying virtually all of the submitted material from Wikipedia, word for word. What is the process to dispute this and pursue a refund for the hours billed?

I see that the dispute process apparently requires us to file any disputes within 5 days after a billing period ends, and only covers hours and not quality of work. But in this case, the "quality of work" issue is more of a "freelancer delivered illegal, stolen material" issue. Surely Upwork will do something if the freelancer doesn't return these funds?

firescue17 · ‎03-25-2018

@Prashant P wrote:
I have seen many people in real life kicking the vending machines even after they get the stuff with a hope that stuck coins in the chute may fall and they would be richer.

@Prashant P wrote:
I just wanted to shine some sunlight in his world.

For once you managed to. That's funny.

resultsassoc · ‎03-28-2018

The OP thought he was raising just one issue - plagiarism - and everyone agrees that it's bad. He actually raised another issue: paying hourly for writing.

The written product has value, the hours do not. If I took six hours to write what Nicola, Wendy, et al, could produce in thirty minutes, my product is no more valuable than theirs. Paying by the hour for writing is a poor bargain for the client. It rewards the slow and lazy, and pays for input instead of output.

Using tracked time makes it worse. You're compelled to pay for tracked time, regardless of output. I will not do hourly writing jobs for too many reasons to list.

Think of writing, or translation, or several other kinds of work, like surgery. You want your ruptured appendix removed, and that's fixed price. Live interpreters get paid by the hour, but interpreting and translation are entirely different.

For those who are unaware of it, time-tracking software is so easy to bypass that any freelancer who hasn't figured out how is too stupid to do work for me. I won't repeat the mistake I made on elance of telling you how to bypass it. I was deservedly sent to the naughty corner for that.

wendy_writes · ‎03-28-2018

Hurrah @ Bill's logic. I have dear writer friends who almost always work hourly and God love them for their patience, have tried to walk me through the intricacies of Time Tracker for writing. However, that just isn't the way my brain works - for any number of reasons.

Devin and others - there are good and bad clients just like there are good and bad freelancers in all genres. Along with all the other 'red flags' mentioned, always, ALWAYS, have a Skype chat with the person you will be working with before you agree to take on a job. You learn more about the job and the person in a 15 minute call than you will ever learn through emails and messaging.

sam-sly · ‎03-29-2018

@Bill H wrote:
The OP thought he was raising just one issue - plagiarism - and everyone agrees that it's bad. He actually raised another issue: paying hourly for writing....

For those who are unaware of it, time-tracking software is so easy to bypass that any freelancer who hasn't figured out how is too stupid to do work for me. I won't repeat the mistake I made on elance of telling you how to bypass it. I was deservedly sent to the naughty corner for that.

I am not sure why you feel the need to over-generalize about how it is "wrong" to pay or to charge hourly for writing. The contract type has absolutely nothing to do with plagiarism. As a writer, I do both hourly and fixed rate. In the past, I used hourly contracts because the client preferred to pay this way. I often earn less money on average with hourly projects.

My pet peeve is how you keep mentioning that a freelancer who doesn't scam the time tracker is not as smart as one that does. I am not interested in spending my time figuring out how to scam people. I have a high proportion of ongoing and repeat clients. I personally feel it is smarter to cultivate ongoing business relationships than to cut corners for a quick buck.

Whether someone uses hourly or fixed rate contracts is just a matter of preference. Both methods give clients an opportunity to review the work. Neither contract option has anything to do with plagiarism.

reinierb · ‎03-29-2018

@Samantha S wrote:
@Bill H wrote:
The OP thought he was raising just one issue - plagiarism - and everyone agrees that it's bad. He actually raised another issue: paying hourly for writing....

For those who are unaware of it, time-tracking software is so easy to bypass that any freelancer who hasn't figured out how is too stupid to do work for me. I won't repeat the mistake I made on elance of telling you how to bypass it. I was deservedly sent to the naughty corner for that.
I am not sure why you feel the need to over-generalize about how it is "wrong" to pay or to charge hourly for writing. The contract type has absolutely nothing to do with plagiarism. As a writer, I do both hourly and fixed rate. In the past, I used hourly contracts because the client preferred to pay this way. I often earn less money on average with hourly projects.

My pet peeve is how you keep mentioning that a freelancer who doesn't scam the time tracker is not as smart as one that does. I am not interested in spending my time figuring out how to scam people. I have a high proportion of ongoing and repeat clients. I personally feel it is smarter to cultivate ongoing business relationships than to cut corners for a quick buck.

Whether someone uses hourly or fixed rate contracts is just a matter of preference. Both methods give clients an opportunity to review the work. Neither contract option has anything to do with plagiarism.

More telling though is the fact that Bill considers freelancers who can't scam the time tracker as too dumb to work for him, as he has stated elsewhere. This can only mean that Bill actually prefers that only scammers work for him, which begs this question- what other questionable behaviour does he expect from his preferred freelancers?

petra_r · ‎03-30-2018

Bill keeps spouting this same insulting nonsense over and over again.

Bill, if you don't want to do hourly writing and translating jobs - Don't do them.

If you lack the imagination or knowledge to comprehend that there are many good reasons to use hourly contracts for SOME such contracts, that's on you.

But there is no need or excuse for such ignorant and offensive remarks. Repeatedly.

There are contracts that lend themselves to fixed rate contracts.

There are contracts that lend themselves to hourly contracts.

There are clients who prefer one over the other and freelancers who prefer one over the other.

Neither is wrong, and you don't get to come to ridiculously damning conclusions about contracts and business relationships you haven't the faintest clue about.

Enough already!

charles_kozierok · ‎03-30-2018

"Think of writing, or translation, or several other kinds of work, like surgery. You want your ruptured appendix removed, and that's fixed price."

Here's the problem with your analogy.

"Oh, sorry, I thought I wanted my appendix removed, but I really didn't."

"Did I say appendix? I meant gall bladder."

"I know the job was just for the appendix, but would you mind tightening some loose skin in the area while you are there?"

"You did the surgery but not the way I wanted! Wasn't it obvious how you were supposed to do this?! I'm not paying for that!"

"Thanks for doing all that prep work, but I've decided another surgeon can do it cheaper so stop. No, of course I'm not paying you anything, you didn't do the surgery!"

"So about this surgery, I have 10 questions I'd like you to answer, and I consider that included in the cost. I'm only available at these hours for you to answer them. Say, the weather is lovely outside isn't it? How is it there?"

Etc.

Fixed rate jobs represent a significant downside risk to the freelancer except when the job is extremely well-defined, and often even then.

I started out doing nearly entirely fixed rate jobs. I've slowly moved towards hourly, but it's really a "hybrid" approach. Very few clients just hire me and say "go for it" -- most want a rough estimate of hours, which I nearly always hit. This provides flexibility so that the client doesn't have unlimited cost exposure, while I am protected from scope creep and flightiness.

"For those who are unaware of it, time-tracking software is so easy to bypass that any freelancer who hasn't figured out how is too stupid to do work for me."

This is just dripping with cynicism. Sounds like you have not hired well.

I have never used that software, and I wouldn't work for any client that required me to use spyware because he didn't trust me enough to provide good value for the money.

colettelewis · ‎03-30-2018

I think this thread has gone so off topic, it should be abandoned. We should all agree that copying other people's work is fraud, and agree to disagree on Upwork's work choices - each to his or her own.

wendy_writes · ‎03-30-2018

Charles K wrote "Fixed rate jobs represent a significant downside risk to the freelancer except when the job is extremely well-defined, and often even then."

Charles, if the FLer does his job - scope out and document the work needed through conversation(s) with a potential client before signing on to do the job - this doesn't hold true. This is info that should be in your contract (signed by both parties) in advance and included in the workroom. The same info should be duplicated as much as possible in the milestones set-up.

You do realize that without using TT software (which is a big part of why I won't do hourly jobs in the main) there is zero guarantee you will be paid? My bet is yes, you do - and you make it a point to know your client before rushing into a job.

Too many FLers haven't figured that aspect out yet -

charles_kozierok · ‎04-01-2018

Wendy, I always try to make 100% clear with the client what the job entails and what I will be doing for how much money.

But I'm still always aware that I am taking a chance. That there's a possibility of miscommunication, of scope creep due to the client not really understanding what he wanted, or flat out exploitation.

The bottom line is that no matter what you agree to with a client on a fixed rate job, they can decide for any reason that they don't like what you did and refuse to pay you, and then you are stuck.

I have never actually drawn up a contract with a client. This might make sense for very large jobs, but doesn't for small ones. And even if I draw up a contract, the same sort of issue exists -- what am I going to do, hire a lawyer at $300 an hour to get the client to pay his $500 bill?

The sad truth is that all work done on a flat rate job here is at the freelancer's risk. This, by the way, was not the case with eLance.

petra_r · ‎04-01-2018

@Charles K wrote:

The sad truth is that all work done on a flat rate job here is at the freelancer's risk. This, by the way, was not the case with eLance.

Actually it was. You just weren't as aware of the fact as you are here and now.

The whole Escrow system and rules was taken almost 1:1 from Elance.

oDesk had no Escrow system at all and there was no way to "make" a client pay either, yet there were LESS "My Client didn't pay me" posts back than than there are now. I never once didn't get paid when it was "Get hired, do the work, hand it to the client, who'll then either pay you or not pay you!"

Why? Because the more "protection" people have, the less careful they get. They go into contracts or enter into deals with clients without doing their due diligence. They think "Oh Upwork protects me!" and then get the shock of their lives.

It's much the same as real life. People negotiate deadly jumps from cliffs or climb murderous mountains in fatal weather without a scratch, yet break every bone in their body stumbling over their slippers. People are often "safer" in obviously risky situation, because they are alert and carefuly, than in seemingly safe situations, lulled into a (false) sense of security.

charles_kozierok · ‎04-01-2018

(Removed. I don't feel like having this argument again. If anyone here wants to feel like they are "protected" when a client can simply refuse to pay for any reason, the median fixed-rate job is below $300, and it costs $300 for arbitration, go ahead. I think you're deluding yourself.)

bobafett999 · ‎04-01-2018

@Charles K wrote:
(Removed. I don't feel like having this argument again. If anyone here wants to feel like they are "protected" when a client can simply refuse to pay for any reason, the median fixed-rate job is below $300, and it costs $300 for arbitration, go ahead. I think you're deluding yourself.)

In most instances I don't agree with you charles, but I do agree with you on this one.

How did you find the median job price?

tlsanders · ‎04-01-2018

@Charles K wrote:

The sad truth is that all work done on a flat rate job here is at the freelancer's risk.

Charles, that's only true if you are unable or unwilling to pay for arbitration. I agree that the fixed price model provides zero protection for low-billing freelancers who can't see the process through, and that's a serious problem. But, it's certainly not applicable to all fixed-price work.

bobafett999 · ‎04-01-2018

@Tiffany S wrote:
@Charles K wrote:

The sad truth is that all work done on a flat rate job here is at the freelancer's risk.
Charles, that's only true if you are unable or unwilling to pay for arbitration.

Tiffany: But Charles does have a valid point. If median price is $300 that means half of the job on Upwork are below that level. So if a job is say $100, what would a freelancer gain by spending the $300? You may argue that you can use it to bluff the buyer. Hoping he would not be inclined or gamble to lose $400. (100 escrow+300 fee).

tlsanders · ‎04-01-2018

Prashant, if Charles's figure is true (I haven't ever seen any such data divulged, so I think there's a good chance that's one of those "from what I've seen" type "statistics"), then the problem I mentioned earlier--that low-billing freelancers working on small jobs have no protection--is more widespread than I suspected. But, that is just one of the many ways in which Upwork is not well suited to freelancers whose business model involves a high volume of tiny jobs rather than the ongoing relationships that are most profitable for Upwork.

I'm at a loss, though, as to what reasonable protection Upwork could offer. In my mind, the biggest problem isn't that those freelancers are effectively unprotected, but that it is not made clear to them in advance that they are working without a net.

firescue17 · ‎04-01-2018

@Tiffany S wrote:
I'm at a loss, though, as to what reasonable protection Upwork could offer. In my mind, the biggest problem isn't that those freelancers are effectively unprotected, but that it is not made clear to them in advance that they are working without a net.

This.

Upwork is simply not going to throw money out the window for goodwill. Nor should they be expected to.

However, the gimmicky sales pitch, "... Upwork Fixed-Price Protection uses escrow to help ensure that your clients get the work they've asked for and you get paid for work completed ..." is confusing at best, if not outright misleading.

There is zero information about any of this nonsense in the top search engine result "Fixed-Price Protection for Freelancers."

Burying information in triple deep nested bullet points on the 17th page of the Terms and Conditions is the same tactic finance companies got slapped for over APYs and manipulating the order of transaction processing to maximize overdrafts and late fees.

reinierb · ‎04-02-2018

@Steven E. L wrote:

However, the gimmicky sales pitch, "... Upwork Fixed-Price Protection uses escrow to help ensure that your clients get the work they've asked for and you get paid for work completed ..." is confusing at best, if not outright misleading.

A nice bit of sharp practice, that. In fact, it is the sharpest piece of misleading advertising I have seen in a long while.

charles_kozierok · ‎04-02-2018

@Tiffany S wrote:
Prashant, if Charles's figure is true (I haven't ever seen any such data divulged, so I think there's a good chance that's one of those "from what I've seen" type "statistics"), then the problem I mentioned earlier--that low-billing freelancers working on small jobs have no protection--is more widespread than I suspected.

You can easily see the distribution of flat rate job budgets via advanced search. Granted that not every job ends up being as budgeted, but it's reasonable to assume that the vast majority will at least be reasonably close.

Tiffany, even you, with your experience and history, had 75% of your last 20 fixed rate jobs at $100 or less. Of the remaining five, two were small enough that arbitration would have consumed all or most of the earnings, leaving 15% that would have been worth taking to arbitration. It might be coincidence but these nearly exactly match the distribution I calculated from the search page last night (76% below $500 and 86% below $1000).

I generally agree with your other point. While they certainly could provide more real protection (the reason they don't, as always, is that they'd make less money) I don't expect them to. My issue is that freelancers are led to believe that they have protection they do not. And then experienced freelancers reinforce this by arguing over technicalities when the bottom line is that for the typical flat rate job here, you can be put in a position where you will not be paid and there's nothing practical you can do about it. So again, the lesson is to choose clients carefully.

PS Richard, no you may not. 😉

richard_wein · ‎04-02-2018

@Charles K wrote:

The sad truth is that all work done on a flat rate job here is at the freelancer's risk. This, by the way, was not the case with eLance.

If I can be excused a brief grumpy-old-man moment...

It's very confusing when people refer to fixed price jobs as "fixed rate" or "flat rate". $X is a price. $X/hr is a rate. So it's hourly jobs that are fixed/flat rate.

Whatever do they teach young people in schools today? Not calculus, it seems.

colettelewis · ‎04-02-2018

@Richard W wrote:
@Charles K wrote:

The sad truth is that all work done on a flat rate job here is at the freelancer's risk. This, by the way, was not the case with eLance.
If I can be excused a brief grumpy-old-man moment...

It's very confusing when people refer to fixed price jobs as "fixed rate" or "flat rate". $X is a price. $X/hr is a rate. So it's hourly jobs that are fixed/flat rate.

Whatever do they teach young people in schools today? Not calculus, it seems.

______________________________

Rate

This is the OED (US) definition: A fixed price paid or charged for something, especially goods or services . . .

Merriam Webster: 3b: a charge, payment, or price fixed according to a ratio, scale or

standard . . .

Macmillan: An amount of money that is paid or charged

So I reckon a rate can be "fixed" or "flat".

astro_writer · ‎04-02-2018

If I can be excused a brief grumpy-old-man moment...

It's very confusing when people refer to fixed price jobs as "fixed rate" or "flat rate". $X is a price. $X/hr is a rate. So it's hourly jobs that are fixed/flat rate.

Whatever do they teach young people in schools today? Not calculus, it seems.

I think "rate" is commonly accepted as interchangeable with "price," at least in the US. The US Post Office even offers "Flat Rate" boxes and envelopes that cost one price regardless of weight.

Also, could "fixed rate" not refer to the rate of $/job?

richard_wein · ‎04-03-2018

@Sapna R. D wrote:

If I can be excused a brief grumpy-old-man moment...

It's very confusing when people refer to fixed price jobs as "fixed rate" or "flat rate". $X is a price. $X/hr is a rate. So it's hourly jobs that are fixed/flat rate.

Whatever do they teach young people in schools today? Not calculus, it seems.
I think "rate" is commonly accepted as interchangeable with "price," at least in the US. The US Post Office even offers "Flat Rate" boxes and envelopes that cost one price regardless of weight.

Also, could "fixed rate" not refer to the rate of $/job?

Hi Sapna. Freelancers do not offer a fixed rate of, say, $100 per job regardless of content. THAT would indeed be a fixed rate (fixed $/job), but it's not what is meant by a "fixed price" contract in Upwork.

It's the difference between being fixed for one job, and being fixed over all jobs.

P.S. Since the "flat rate contract" usage makes sense to so many intelligent people, I accept that they are taking the word "rate" in a different sense than I would. Maybe it's partly a US/UK thing, but that usage seems strange to me. However, I'm not saying it's outright wrong. I'm not a linguistic prescriptivist or grammar nazi, just a grumpy old man.

charles_kozierok · ‎04-04-2018

@Richard W wrote:
However, I'm not saying it's outright wrong. I'm not a linguistic prescriptivist or grammar nazi, just a grumpy old man.

You know, Richard, you don't have to choose. You can easily be all of those things at the same time. 🙂

petra_r · ‎04-04-2018

@Richard W wrote:
However, I'm not saying it's outright wrong. I'm not a linguistic prescriptivist or grammar ~~nazi,~~ just a grumpy old man.

Offensive use of word. Please do NOT throw that about like that. Killing millions of people and messing up a word in a sentence is not comparable or remotely amusing and frankly the use of that term in this way makes me lose every last shred of respect for the person who uses it immediately.

versailles · ‎04-04-2018

Americans are less sensitive to this word that us Europeans.

-----------
"Where darkness shines like dazzling light" —William Ashbless

wendy_writes · ‎04-04-2018

Rene, given the last 12-18 months Americans should be equally sensitive ... 😞

That said, it simply is not a term to be used lightly or in reference to something as piddling as the offender used it.

petra_r · ‎04-04-2018

@Rene K wrote:
Americans are less sensitive to this word than us Europeans.

The person using it was a Brit.

Trying to be funny.

Maybe a few hours of watching documentaries of smoldering mountains of bodies would help drum it into even the dumbest soul that it isn't funny. That it is disgustingly offensive.

And yes, it upsets me. Deeply.

reinierb · ‎04-04-2018

@Petra R wrote:
@Rene K wrote:
Americans are less sensitive to this word than us Europeans.
The person using it was a Brit.
Trying to be funny.
Maybe a few hours of watching documentaries of smoldering mountains of bodies would help drum it into even the dumbest soul that it isn't funny. That it is disgustingly offensive.
And yes, it upsets me. Deeply.

"Disgustingly offensive" does not even begin to describe the sheer offensiveness of the word, and even more so when it is used in jest.

nkocendova · ‎04-04-2018

Hi All,

This thread has now been closed from further replies as it has gone off topic.

~Nina