Solved: My proposals are archived! - Page 6

e91667f8 · ‎12-28-2018

Who can explain me why the half of my new proposals are archived? Today I posted a job to find a good freelancer for my project, but an hour later I discovered that the most of the proposals are in the archive list. What's going on? I even didn't have an opportunity to review the freelancers. Upwork promotes some freelancers and hides others?

lenaellis · ‎01-22-2019

Hi Everyone,

We apologize for the delay, but understand we may not always be able to address posts with urgency, especially over the weekend or holidays. We understand and have read your feedback and grievances. We are glad that many of you are pleased with the Talent Services decision to no longer archive proposals. At the same time, we will not be reimbursing connects. These proposals were archived, not deleted, which means clients still had full access to all submitted proposals and were able to see the total amount of proposals listed in each section.

Rest assured, archiving will not be replaced by any new process. Proposals would only appear in the Archived list if the client or freelancer took action on the proposal. Talent Specialists will only be shortlisting proposals, as they have done. The Shortlisted list highlights proposals that Talent Specialists want to share with clients, this separate list which does not affect or touch proposals in the All Proposals list.

The All Proposals tab includes all active proposals. Proposals withdrawn by freelancers or clients, and declined invites are not included in this active list, those would be found in the Archived list. The All Proposals list displays Best match as the default sorting order. However, clients can sort the proposal list as they see fit: Newest to Oldest, Highest to Lowest rate, etc. The total amount of proposals in a tab is always visible at the top alongside the navigation link.

ATS Sort.png

As for Talent Specialists in general, they will continue improving their services and training. We recognize the comments shared in the Community. Feedback about irrelevant invites is shared with their team and actioned when necessary. Obviously, we wouldn’t keep or push a program that wasn’t working or producing results. Currently, Talent Services assists with around 5% of all jobs on the platform and these jobs have a higher fill rate as well as end with high success rates and great feedback. And as mentioned before, both clients and freelancer are given an option to opt out of the service.

View solution in original post

mousseva · ‎01-12-2019

I'm just wondering if they start archiving them after the job has received 20-30 proposals? Just wondering if it makes sense to apply to such jobs at all.

mousseva · ‎01-13-2019

Thoughts? Anyone?

wendy_writes · ‎01-13-2019

We have for asked for exact wording and screenshots which Steve H said was forthcoming.

Seeing these will answer at least some of the questions.

ETA on these, please.

lysis10 · ‎01-13-2019

Thought I'd come back and give an update since I contributed to the paranoia.

Client just sent me an offer, so she did see my proposal (someone actually bid higher than me too and it showed up at least in the range that I could see). Crisis averted. I was worried but looks like it worked out ok.

So at least we know over budget isn't always a factor or I'd be in big doodoo if that were true.

wendy_writes · ‎01-13-2019

Jennifer and/or Petra, you might have some insight into this: Are invites - either buyer initiated or U. generated - subject to the whim and fancy of incompetent 'talent specialists'?

versailles · ‎01-13-2019

I think as long as no TS are involved, you're fine. If they get involved, then all bets are off.

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

lysis10 · ‎01-13-2019

My invites are down, so I haven't gotten many in the last few weeks. I think the last few from TA I've had to decline.

I don't do well when TAs invite me. Maybe it's my approach, but not sure. But then again, I'm not sure I won much in the open marketplace last year. Probably in the beginning of the year, but according to my stats as of about the first of the month I only sent 2 open marketplace bids within the last 90 days

Actually, I think I did speak with one maybe like 2 months ago. I'm not sure but looking back the person I was talking to was looking for someone for her client. I thought I was talking to an agency but maybe it was a TA. As much as I wanted to take the job (probably could have charged $150/hour because I know she was having a hard time finding someone with experience), it was too far out of my skill set. I don't even think I could bs my way through an article lol. So, I did get a decline message but she chatted with me a bit and I thought of 1000 different ways I could take their money but mannnn there was no way I'd be able to remotely come close to what they wanted so I had to be honest and tell them that I'm probably not a good fit.

petra_r · ‎01-13-2019

Wendy C wrote:
Jennifer and/or Petra, you might have some insight into this: Are invites - either buyer initiated or U. generated - subject to the whim and fancy of incompetent 'talent specialists'?

Sorry, no insight at all. This whole mess caught me as much by stunned surprise as it did you.

petra_r · ‎01-13-2019

Wendy C wrote:
We have for asked for exact wording and screenshots which Steve H said was forthcoming.

He did (say that "exact wording and screenshots were forthcoming"?) Where?

He's not been back since he posted that "response."

I very much doubt that any Upwork employee would post "exact wording and screenshots."

reinierb · ‎01-13-2019

Petra R wrote:
Wendy C wrote:
We have for asked for exact wording and screenshots which Steve H said was forthcoming.
He did (say that "exact wording and screenshots were forthcoming"?) Where?
He's not been back since he posted that "response."

I very much doubt that any Upwork employee would post "exact wording and screenshots."

I agree. Many of us would immediately point out that the messages are poorly worded, and I don't think they would want to hear that on top of the overall uproar about the whole talent specialist thing.

versailles · ‎01-14-2019

Danny R wrote:
This is how Upwork fights against the truth. Just want evrybody to know

You cannot post correspondence from Upwork here. And since this community has no idea what happened, what you did or did not, we won't take sides about the action taken by Upwork on your account.

Sorry bud.

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

petra_r · ‎01-14-2019

Danny R wrote:
I'm Dan R. and I started this thread. After that they just blocked me.

They didn't block you because you posted in this thread.

They suspended your client account because something about your job post(s) was not in line with the terms of service.

ahmed_foula · ‎01-14-2019

Petra R wrote:
Danny R wrote:
I'm Dan R. and I started this thread. After that they just blocked me.
They didn't block you because you posted in this thread.
They suspended your client account because something about your job post(s) was not in line with the terms of service.

For me, both reasons are valid!

⋰⋱⋰⋱⋰⋱⋰⋱⋰⋱⋰⋱⋰⋱

petra_r · ‎01-14-2019

Danny R wrote:
I just tried to find a good mobile and web developer for my projects.

Under an almost certainly not real name, from a "known for funny business / scams / spam / viruses" email domain, with no verified payment method...

mtngigi · ‎01-14-2019

Petra R wrote:
Danny R wrote:
I just tried to find a good mobile and web developer for my projects.
Under an almost certainly not real name, from a "known for funny business / scams / spam / viruses" email domain, with no verified payment method...

Perhaps ... but I hope "Dan's" latest posts don't derail this whole thing, because at least, thanks to the OP, we were informed of this odious practice.

petra_r · ‎01-14-2019

How about we find a way to make this whole thing more palatable and fair to all involved? (If we can't throw the whole thing out?)

Ideas:

In an ideal world, get rid of the scheme altogether
If that is not possible:

Mark jobs where a TS is involved clearly, with some icon such as the Enterprise jobs or featured jobs have, so we know that those people are messing with the proposals.

Add a metric to the "activity for this job" numbers, so in addition to "invites sent, hires, interviewing and so on, let's have "archived by client" and "archived by TS" numbers

On a freelancer's Proposals page, separate active and archived proposals under a separate header, like so, again with a note if declined by client or TS:

colettelewis · ‎01-14-2019

Virginia F wrote:
Petra R wrote:
Danny R wrote:
I just tried to find a good mobile and web developer for my projects.
Under an almost certainly not real name, from a "known for funny business / scams / spam / viruses" email domain, with no verified payment method...
Perhaps ... but I hope "Dan's" latest posts don't derail this whole thing, because at least, thanks to the OP, we were informed of this odious practice.

_______________________

Agreed. Whatever the reasons for the OP's suspension, doesn't alter the fact that freelancers' proposals are being arbitrarily archived before clients have had the chance to assess them and make their own judgements, and I would like to bet that, in these cases, connects are not returned.

Added to which, in another thread on this subject: https://community.upwork.com/t5/Announcements/Update-on-Talent-Specialists-Program/m-p/465332#M24756 Steve Holm states:

"I know that there have been a number of comments about the relevancy of some of these invites. It is not our goal to send invites that are a waste of both the freelancers’ and clients’ time. Our team relies heavily on the skills listed in the job post and skills listed on freelancers’ profiles when sending invites. Have mistakes been made, certainly. However, this is a small percentage of the total invites sent. Our program has been very successful in contributing to the fill-rates of jobs on Upwork and with assisting new and existing clients.

That being said, we strive to do better. We hear your concerns and are making changes to address them."

The only thing that appears to be true is that a minority of freelancers have to suffer for the good of the whole ...

And time is being wasted by clients when they are presented with freelancers who do not match their requirements, and freelancers, who are obliged to reply to jobs they know they are not going to get or decline them: All because a TS has clearly not done his or her homework. I would love to know, when I get an unsuitable TS-driven invite, how many suitable proposals they bin that a client might be interested in.

I wonder how many clients have received this dysfunctional service, and without complaining, have simply gone elsewhere to hire a freelancer.

As to making changes to address the concerns - clearly unheard - if changes have been made, they have certainly not been for the better.

gilbert-phyllis · ‎01-14-2019

Virginia F wrote:
Petra R wrote:
Danny R wrote:
I just tried to find a good mobile and web developer for my projects.
Under an almost certainly not real name, from a "known for funny business / scams / spam / viruses" email domain, with no verified payment method...
Perhaps ... but I hope "Dan's" latest posts don't derail this whole thing, because at least, thanks to the OP, we were informed of this odious practice.

This latest episode is generating a big dose of irony for a Monday.

versailles · ‎01-14-2019

Problem: taking into consideration everything surrounding the OP, "Dan", and the questionable .ru domain he's involved with, I'm now even wondering how much truth there is in his initial post...

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

browersr · ‎01-14-2019

Rene K wrote:
Problem: taking into consideration everything surrounding the OP, "Dan", and the questionable .ru domain he's involved with, I'm now even wondering how much truth there is in his initial post...

It actually doesn't matter. We could throw out Dan's posts entirely and just focus on the details Steve from UW provided and everything else remains germane. UW has admitted to this practice and the details surrounding it. That is the true focus of the opposing points made.

petra_r · ‎01-15-2019

Scott B wrote:
Rene K wrote:
Problem: taking into consideration everything surrounding the OP, "Dan", and the questionable .ru domain he's involved with, I'm now even wondering how much truth there is in his initial post...
It actually doesn't matter. We could throw out Dan's posts entirely and just focus on the details Steve from UW provided

Exactly.

m_terrazas · ‎01-15-2019

Scott B wrote:

It actually doesn't matter. We could throw out Dan's posts entirely and just focus on the details Steve from UW provided and everything else remains germane. UW has admitted to this practice and the details surrounding it. That is the true focus of the opposing points made.

Anyway, although Dan (or Danny) may be questionable, we should not forget that there were three other clients, @Sarah H., @Samuel A. and @Tanika T. (this I do not know for sure she was a client), who denounced the same problem.

mtngigi · ‎01-15-2019

Rene K wrote:
Problem: taking into consideration everything surrounding the OP, "Dan", and the questionable .ru domain he's involved with, I'm now even wondering how much truth there is in his initial post...

it's not like this is the first time we're hearing about how the "talent specialists" consistently get it wrong ... but this is the first time we're hearing about this program (and it's cons) from actual clients (aside from the OP). And the trashing our bids thing. That has been an eye-opener.

mtngigi · ‎01-14-2019

The plot sickens. This thread makes me almost as miserable as I feel when watching the daily antics of our fake president.

wendy_writes · ‎01-15-2019

Thumbs Up and Kudos to Scott for his astute comment.

dzadza · ‎01-15-2019

so...my stats say:
You've applied to 72 jobs in the past 90 days
I haven't received a single reply, my proposals weren't declined (and of course, I didn't land a single job). Am I to assume that all of those proposals ended up in the oubliette? I believe I was a good fit for all of them - and I don't have a problem if the client doesn't want to hire me, or doesn't like my portfolio or proposal - but if someone who was constantly inviting me to translating jobs, video editing, proofreading and composing projects (!) is throwing my proposlas in some virtual trash bin (without me knowing, of course), I would like my connects back please. I did pay for those, you know...

jmlaidlaw · ‎01-15-2019

@Sanja D.

Slight correction/clarification: "...is throwing my proposlas in some virtual trash bin -- although the Terms of Service (Section 2.1) assure me that 'Upwork... makes the Site and Site Services available to enable Freelancers and Clients to find and transact directly with each other [and that] Upwork does not... find Freelancers for Clients' and that 'at all times... [u]sers are responsible for evaluating and determining the suitability of any... Freelancer on their own' -- (without me knowing, of course), I would like my connects back please. I did pay for those, you know..."

ericleeclark · ‎01-16-2019

I'm glad I found this thread! I'm new to Upwork. I've gotten 3 jobs so far after sending 56 proposals. Every proposal I send is thoughtful and custom to the job I'm applying for. I have received great feedback so far and I'm really trying to build up my reviews to keep building momentum. Sadly, this thread has taken some wind out of my sails. I'm now questioning if I'm using the right platform.

It's disheartening to know that some of my proposals are being discarded by someone who doesn't know me, the quality of my work, and the experience I bring to the table. Especially being new -- how much is that working against me? Begs the question, as someone just starting out should I even bother trying to build up my profile on Upwork?

It's especially frustrating to know that I am paying for connects and they may be totally wasted. Upwork has yet to respond how connects we're paying for are handled when someone other than the client archives our proposal.

petra_r · ‎01-16-2019

Eric C wrote:

It's especially frustrating to know that I am paying for connects and they may be totally wasted. Upwork has yet to respond how connects we're paying for are handled when someone other than the client archives our proposal.

Personally I don't pay for Connects but that is one of the most "interesting" facets of this whole farce.

Upwork simply can not take money for Connects and then instruct those Talent Specialists to chuck out the proposals bought with the Connects they sold you.

It's pretty much like a lottery company selling you tickets, and then letting some employee decide which lottery tickets will reach the draw and which will not.

mtngigi · ‎01-16-2019

Petra R wrote:
Eric C wrote:

It's especially frustrating to know that I am paying for connects and they may be totally wasted. Upwork has yet to respond how connects we're paying for are handled when someone other than the client archives our proposal.
Personally I don't pay for Connects but that is one of the most "interesting" facets of this whole farce.
Upwork simply can not take money for Connects and then instruct those Talent Specialists to chuck out the proposals bought with the Connects they sold you.

It's pretty much like a lottery company selling you tickets, and then letting some employee decide which lottery tickets will reach the draw and which will not.

I can't imagine that it's legal to take money for a product you're not giving in return ... perhaps this is what's taking them so long to respond ... "let's see, how can we put a good spin on stealing a freelancer's money without giving them anything in return?" Uh-oh ... we can't.

gilbert-phyllis · ‎01-16-2019

What Petra said, and also... You may or may not be suffering impact from that TS archiving travesty. None of us knows which of our proposals, if any, get binned. But your numbers don't necessarily indicate it's the case.

I just took a quick look at my own history. I joined UW in August 2016. I happily accept both fixed-price and hourly contracts, depending on the scope of work and the client's needs and preferences. I currently have 370 archived proposals and 30 contracts with around 20 clients (including active, paused and closed). I was tied up with obligations off the platform for the middle six months of 2018 and submitted no proposals and accepted no invitations during that time. As soon as I became more available, existing clients popped up with more than enough work to keep me busy (combined with off-platform projects). I am currently exchanging emails with a potential new client for an immediate project. She liked a proposal I submitted last spring but had a very tight timeline I couldn't meet. She contacted me yesterday about something new, and we are in the process of figuring out whether I can deliver what she needs within her timeframe. If we can work it out, it'll be an UW contract, of course. I mention it to illustrate how any seed you sow can eventually bear fruit. I feel like she and I are a good fit, so even if this one doesn't work out, either, another one eventually will (especially if I can get her to plan a little farther ahead!).

It's a long game. It doesn't help that UW is such a slave to the algorithm (and under-compensated and therefore, under-qualified staffing). But the boneheaded processes and policies notwithstanding, it's been a great tool for me.

colettelewis · ‎01-16-2019

Quite a few jobs I have bid on recently have had only a few proposals - and it always seems to be just five. I wonder if this is the cut-off point and any other bids however suitable get archived. I never bid on entry-level jobs or poorly paid jobs.

Perhaps these jobs are invitation only and so are simply wallpaper when one sees them in one's job feed. It is difficult to assess anything correctly at the moment.

jmlaidlaw · ‎01-16-2019

Imagine if some enterprising attorney were to organize a class-action lawsuit against Upwork, in which those affected by this "poofing" of proposals were created as plaintiffs. (At least once a year I am contacted by mail and told that I am automatically part of some class action or another -- maybe because I purchased toothpaste with a faulty screw-on cap, or because I flew on an airline that overcharged for checked luggage, or because I owned a car that included an engine part that should have been subject to a recall. Or maybe even because I might have used talcum powder!)

Is UW's recordkeeping detailed enough to allow a reconstruction of whose proposals were archived and whose were not? How would anyone ever be able to prove (or, more to the point: able to defend against the accusation of) economic harm done to any Freelancer whose proposal was thus hidden from a prospective client? Could UW find itself in the position of being liable to reimburse all Freelancers for paid "Connects"? What would be the liability to Freelancers who used the site and availed themselves of un-paid "Connects," but whose proposals were subject to un-wanted, un-solicited, and potentially detrimental intermediation by a Talent Specialist?

richard_wein · ‎01-16-2019

On a related but less important point, I object to the fact that archived and declined proposals are not included in the displayed number of proposals. It gives us a false impression of how much competition there is for the job. Like most freelancers (I assume), I'm more inclined to apply for a job which is shown as having fewer proposals already. But the reason the job has fewer proposals shown could have nothing to with the level of competition. It could be purely because that client or a TS has been declining/archiving some proposals, as compared with another job where rejected proposals are left active.

jmlaidlaw · ‎01-16-2019

@ Richard W.

This observation underscores the fact that archived proposals produce an adverse effect that potentially affects ALL Freelancers -- even those who do not pay for extra Connects.

And I have not even mentioned the adverse economic effects that are potentially visited upon clients, who may not have been able to freely select the best Freelancer for a given project.

colettelewis · ‎01-16-2019

Richard W wrote:
On a related but less important point, I object to the fact that archived and declined proposals are not included in the displayed number of proposals. It gives us a false impression of how much competition there is for the job. Like most freelancers (I assume), I'm more inclined to apply for a job which is shown as having fewer proposals already. But the reason the job has fewer proposals shown could have nothing to with the level of competition. It could be purely because that client or a TS has been declining/archiving some proposals, as compared with another job where rejected proposals are left active.

_______________

Agreed, that is what crossed my mind too.

gilbert-phyllis · ‎01-16-2019

Richard W wrote:
On a related but less important point, I object to the fact that archived and declined proposals are not included in the displayed number of proposals. It gives us a false impression of how much competition there is for the job. Like most freelancers (I assume), I'm more inclined to apply for a job which is shown as having fewer proposals already. But the reason the job has fewer proposals shown could have nothing to with the level of competition. It could be purely because that client or a TS has been declining/archiving some proposals, as compared with another job where rejected proposals are left active.

This.

They should just go ahead and show how many proposals are in every bucket for a job post:

# active (= any proposal submitted that hasn't been declined, archived or withdrawn)

# declined

# archived

# withdrawn

versailles · ‎01-16-2019

Nichola L wrote:

Perhaps these jobs are invitation only and so are simply wallpaper when one sees them in one's job feed. It is difficult to assess anything correctly at the moment.

I a client selects the invite-only option, their job posting does not show in the job feeds.

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

colettelewis · ‎01-16-2019

Rene K wrote:
Nichola L wrote:

Perhaps these jobs are invitation only and so are simply wallpaper when one sees them in one's job feed. It is difficult to assess anything correctly at the moment.

I a client selects the invite-only option, their job posting does not show in the job feeds.

__________________________________

That's what I thought, which makes it odd that a juicy, job offer with an acceptable rate only gets five proposals after being up for an hour or so.

lenaellis · ‎01-16-2019

Hi Everyone,

We appreciate and value the feedback that was shared in this thread and understand your shared concerns. We are always looking to improve our processes. Our goal is to help not hinder the growth of your businesses. Given the feedback that some clients and freelancers were not aware of this part of Talent Services, Talent Specialists have ceased archiving proposals and will no longer archive going forward.

-Lena