Expired posting without refunding connects

[#1]

If a client abandons a project posting to the point that it expires, it should be interpreted as a "client cancellation". It is disappointing that Upwork does not consider these events to be equal. There are too many instances where clients are trolling freelancers without consideration for the freelancers' costs and Upwork is not only allowing it, but profitting from it. 

Edit Sept 7: My biggest beef are clients who make a post on the same day they register on the site and have no client activity in the days that follow. When I see 50+ freelancers bidding, many of those boosted, I want to scream.

[#2]

Hi Mark,

Thank you so much for sharing your feedback. I have forwarded your post to the rest of the team for review; likewise, we will continue providing updates to the Community about the team's initiatives.

[#3]

Thank you for responding RonnaP. I would like there to be a formal response from the team. Please confirm if you are planning to provide an update on this thread.

[#4]

It’s frustrating to see that, despite thousands of complaints and suggestions from millions of freelancers, Upwork often seems to prioritize its own interests over the needs of its users. Many of us feel unheard as the platform continues to implement policies that don't always align with the best interests of freelancers who drive the community. It's a reminder that while our feedback is essential, platforms need to genuinely listen and act in ways that support those who rely on them.

[#5]

Agree 100%. If they are increasing connects they should be fair about expiring jobs as well. 

[#6]

My experience is that UW does not refund connects for closed jobs. Nothing...

[#7]

UW will refund all connects for a project that is physically cancelled by the client.

[#8]

But in this scenario, the Client leaves it open and the system automatically closes it after a certain period.  So this does not fall in this category as technically it wasn't closed by the Client.  This is a loophole that the platform is taking advantage of.  

[#9]

Agreed, UW does not consider this cancelled by client, but I'm suggesting they should. That is the essence of my post.

There may be scenarios where the client has earnestly attempted to find a candidate but failed to do so. It seems unlikely given the pool of talent, but even if we give them the benefit of the doubt, there are clear indicators where the client frivolously posted something and freelances have wasted their time and money bidding on something that was never going to happen. UW can do better to protect our investment. It’s unacceptable to turn a blind eye on "loopholes".

[#10]

I have lost so many connects this way and yet no refunds all the more now that there is no way to reach customer support.

[#11]

Imagine, if you will, a nefarious situation.

Un-named sets up a false job as a 'connect sink'. This attracts a number of paid-for connects. The job times out, connects are retained. Money earned. 'Job' re-cycled. Rinse, repeat.

If this were not the case, and the job was genuine, the connects would be refunded. Nothing earned.