An idea for Upwork

[jeremiah-brown]

I always see Upwork trying new ideas.  Some good, some not so good.

Here's an idea to consider...

Connects to apply for jobs.... 

1. Clients who have a verfied method of payment: may post jobs requiring 2+ connects.
2. Clients who do not have a verified method of payment: may post jobs requiring a maximum of 2 connects.

[arifzilane]

Some verified clients also can scam freelancers. Verified payment methods, posted jobs, and hired freelancers. After that claim for payment on the bank. 

Upwork reverse freelancers' payment to the client. Connect is a small barrier for them. Today, I saw a freelancer post, after 2 months maybe his financial account hold and reverse the amount! 

Upwork should pay every freelancer and add a policy for this. No bank refund. If the client is not happy that's discussable. Investigation both work, that already does Upwork. 

I think Upwork has no policy in this matter. They send a basic hourly protection policy. Which is not doing many freelancers. But they are not investigating it. Just reverse the payment to the client's bank and send the point freelancers. 

[feed_my_eyes]

So again, Upwork didn't choose to reverse your payment; your client's bank took it back. No business can prevent chargebacks. As for "paying every freelancer" - absolutely not. Upwork would quickly go bankrupt if they handed over money every time some feckless and/or scamming freelancer tried to make a claim. I think that their existing payment protection is more than sufficient for people who use the time tracker correctly and abide by the rules.

[jeremiah-brown]

Yes, clients can still scam freelancers and freelancers can still scam clients.  Thats not really the point of the suggestion. 

The point is to cut down on the number of jobs postings that will most likely end in archival instead of a hire.  Whether a job costs 2 connects or is boosted to 8 really makes no difference to me.  However, when I first started freelancing it DID make a big deal.  I applied to scores of 6-connect jobs and for every 10 that I applied to, 8 of them would end up archiving and not hiring anyone at all.  The point is to reduce the turnover of 6-connect jobs to those who are actually hiring. 

After all, the point of a client listing a 6-connect job is because they want applicants who are serious about it - why then, shouldn't we say the same about the person posting it?

[martina_plaschka]

You are misinformed how connects work. The client doesn't choose the number of connects for a posting. 

[geri_kol]

Jeremiah,

The number of connects that a job requires is not determined by clients, who are often unaware that applying for their job listings even requires freelancers to spend money/connects, but by Upwork's algorithm. No one really knows the logic behind that algorithm and how it determines why certain jobs cost 2 connects and others 6 connects, but that´s a topic for a different conversation. 

[martina_plaschka]

Upwork determines it based on contract volume and duration. 

[geri_kol]

If you buy word-for-word everything Upwork claims, sure. I have seen multiple times 6-connect jobs from first-time posters with no contract history and no rating. I think there are legitimate reasons to question the reasonableness of Upwork´s algorithms - same goes for the overly rigid and inscrutable design of its JSS algorithms. 

[feed_my_eyes]

---

Gergana K wrote:

I have seen multiple times 6-connect jobs from first-time posters with no contract history and no rating. 

---

It has nothing to do with the client's contract history and rating - it's supposed to be based on the value of the project, with longer-term and higher-paid contracts costing more connects. Obviously, it doesn't always work because clients sometimes post over-inflated budgets or don't know how long a project will take.

[martina_plaschka]

A first time poster can still have a job with high volume and long duration. 

[tjmisny]

I support this idea!