Inappropriate job question, sweat equity

[florydev]

I just saw a job in my feed that has this in it:

I’m offering 5% and hours of reimbursement for work done.
Or 10% ownership with no reimbursement.

I am entirely not interested and I want to flag it, and any other job I see like it, as inapporpriate, but is it?

[pudingstudio]

If I understood you corectly, I agree.

Clients shouldn't offer anything else than $.

I'd flag all jobs that offer equity/shares. Or promises of payment 'when the start-up company/project becomes successful'.

[gilbert-phyllis · Accepted solution]

I would flag it. Not because I care whether somebody wants to work in exchange for an equity share. Such arrangements between consenting adults are perfectly fine, but this is not the place for it. Compensating a FL by any means other than paying them money through UW is a clear ToS violation. IMO any proposition that muddies the water should be discouraged.

[florydev]

I went back to look at it and someone already whacked it.  Now  I feel like I got beat to the punch or something.  

[wlyonsatl]

If any element of the compensation on a project allows the client or the freelancer to avoid making payment to Upwork for its share of the freelancer's pay, it's not a job that should be posted on Upwork.

Upwork has no way to benefit from a freelancer receiving ownership in a client's company.

[prestonhunter]

re: "I’m offering 5% and hours of reimbursement for work done. Or 10% ownership with no reimbursement."

I have encountered clients who were sincere in their offer of sweat equity. So I don't necessarily assume such people are scammers or anything.

But whether or not the client is sincere, this is simply not something that is allowed on Upwork.

So, yes, it is appropriate to flag such jobs.

[florydev]

Yeah, probably not a scam.  It is pretty common, in my experience, for people to have billion dollar ideas and no money to implement it.  

Which is part of why I asked, wanted to make sure it wasn't just my bias against this.  I assumed the no reimbursement was against TOS, but wasn't sure if others would feel the first part made it reasonable.  I would never go after that but I didn't want to take it away from someone else without gathering some opinions.

Someone else beat me to it anyway.