Jul 26, 2019 11:03:05 AM Edited Jul 26, 2019 01:31:23 PM by Valeria K
The quality of invites I've received has gotten steadily worse in the past year, but this is the most ludicrous I've seen in a while. We're charged 20% fees, we have to pay for connects, clients are now on membership plans ... yet I'm still getting invites like the one below? So is this where the site is heading?
(And how **Edited for Community Guidelines** has this client managed to send hundreds of **Edited for Community Guidelines** invites? Are they on the so-called Business plan? I find it hard to believe that this kind of client is paying Upwork $500 a month...)
**Edited for Community Guidelines**
Solved! Go to Solution.
Jul 27, 2019 06:24:36 PM by Virginia F
Sanja D wrote:
Wendy C wrote:Sanja, it becomes a case of letting words do what the system can't. I know this isn't the ideal but it can be accomplshed.
I know - but it would be kind of confusing if I created a specialized profile for - let's say 2d design (that one does exist) and start with "well, I don't really do this much - but take a look at some examples of my booklet designs" 😉
Especially when most clients wouldn't think (or know) to call their print jobs 2D. All I do is design for print, but within that very broad catagory, lies everything from business cards to trade show banners, from simple flyers to catalogs and posters and event programs and ads and on and on. In the end, print design is a specialized category in and of itself. I do not need, nor want, to separate it out into all the many things I have experience doing. Clients have found me and I have found them, all without a "special" profile.
But mostly, I don't like the fact that we are once again being forced into something, that Upwork is once again inserting itself into our personal business, making decisions that we very well know are never based on any actual knowledge of what will work for us, or what we do.
Give people the option to say no, I don't need or want that. That we can no longer edit our portfolios because we will then be forced into a specialized profile is BS of the highest degree.
Jul 29, 2019 11:08:52 PM by Richard L
Valeria,
Perhaps that is true, but it seems to be an awful business move and doesn't make sense. California requires interest on escrow accounts (as someone pointed out that may be for mortgage).
As someone (might have been the same person) pointed out, the additional 5-day hold hardly makes sense. If Upwork is not making money via interest on that hold time, the job has been approved, so why not let me make the interest 😉
Jul 29, 2019 11:37:09 PM Edited Jul 29, 2019 11:41:34 PM by Douglas Michael M
Richard L wrote:Valeria,
Perhaps that is true, but it seems to be an awful business move and doesn't make sense. California requires interest on escrow accounts (as someone pointed out that may be for mortgage).
As someone (might have been the same person) pointed out, the additional 5-day hold hardly makes sense. If Upwork is not making money via interest on that hold time, the job has been approved, so why not let me make the interest 😉
Escrowed funds are of absolutely no use to the holder except insofar as they facilitate other ends. They cannot be spent. They must be maintained separately from general funds. They cannot be used to generate profit. They can only be transfered from one party to another upon agreement between those parties that the conditions of escrow release have been met. They are in effect not assets, but liabilities.
Upwork is not leaving money on the table. It presumably did the cost-benefit analysis before setting up its escrow corporation to handle escrowed funds, because having their own legal (presumably non-bank) entity is more cost effective than getting the same service from a bank.
Upwork, from its history of experimentation with holding and releasing funds via its escrow corporation, knows what its risks and losses have been and could be, and where the sweet spot is for minimizing losses. They claim this question is under continuing review. The five-day-hold is to date the best stop-loss measure they've been able to come up with.
Jul 29, 2019 04:08:28 PM by Catharine G
Specialized profiles -- for writers, can be more confusing. Cilents often write a web content job as "content creation," but are equally likely to call it "copywriting." There's no consistency. Clients usually can't tell the difference.
Jul 29, 2019 11:16:03 PM by Richard L
"Upwork is governed by California law. I welcome your invitation for a legal research contract."
My research shows CA escrow accounts must be paid interest (could be for mortgages). I don't see anything that says otherwise.
Aug 3, 2019 12:18:49 PM by Tiffany S
Richard, here is the actual California law in question, which is not only mortgage-specific but applies only to residential real estate transactions involving single family dwellings and multi-family complexes with four or fewer units: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=2954.8.
When an escrow account does pay interest, as in this scenario, the escrow agent is not entitled to that interest. It must be paid to the person on whose behalf they are holding the money, and very strict accounting is required.
In the legal field, laws have been passed in most states to sweep interest on client trust accounts into a public-interest fund, because managing that interest was an accounting nightmare--each client would have funds sitting in the account for a few days to a few months, with funds from many other clients, and would be entitled to the precise amount of interest that had been earned on that client's specific money during the specific number of days the money was held. Law firms weren't allowed to keep the money, and could spend many hours calculating which client was entitled to $37.63 versus $.12 and such.
Multiply that by 100,000 or so, and you'll have the legal and accounting obligation Upwork would take on if that money were in an interest bearing account (even if that were permissible). It would take several full time staff members to distribute the few pennies to few dollars each freelancer accrued on each milestone payment.
Aug 3, 2019 11:12:17 PM by Richard L
"It would take several full time staff members to distribute the few pennies to few dollars each freelancer accrued on each milestone payment."
Really? I'm not a programmer, but my guess is that civilization is advanced enough to write some code that would automate that in less than half an hour. you've got to be joking or you are living in a cave.
Jul 29, 2019 04:00:39 PM by Muhammad Saad A
Yes, the new charged connects structure is ridiculous and upwork should've to remove this asap. It's been 3 months and I haven't get any jobs neither invites. The charged connects system have to be removed.
Jul 29, 2019 04:05:50 PM by Sanja D
I doubt that it has anything to do with the new connects system
I didn't land a single project on upwork in 8 months - before paid connects were even introduced
Aug 3, 2019 06:03:38 AM Edited Aug 3, 2019 06:50:46 AM by Aleksandar D
Here's another:
- On the platform since 2014, with a 0% hire rate
- Able to send 400+ invites
- At least it's in my field, but the guy messaged me privately asking for a free test
How can you allow scammers like this and claim that the site's improving?
**Edited for Community Guidelines**
Aug 3, 2019 06:07:36 AM by Sanja D
same with freelancer profiles - 10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Aug 3, 2019 06:14:38 AM by Petra R
Sanja D wrote:10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Is that, strictly speaking, against the terms of use? It may be morally reprehensible, but I don't see how it is a ToS violation?
Aug 3, 2019 06:19:01 AM by Sanja D
Petra R wrote:
Sanja D wrote:10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Is that, strictly speaking, against the terms of use? It may be morally reprehensible, but I don't see how it is a ToS violation?
well - it's copyrighted...you need to credit the author - not to pretend to be the one.
like snatching a text from new york times and selling it as your own.
I think it's supposed to be in the rules - if it isn't... well, I'll just stop flagging those, and clients should stop complaining about freelancer articles being stolen from the internet 😉
Aug 3, 2019 07:05:52 AM by Douglas Michael M
Petra R wrote:
Sanja D wrote:10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Is that, strictly speaking, against the terms of use? It may be morally reprehensible, but I don't see how it is a ToS violation?
It would depend on the licensing terms of the "free" site, and whether they allowed or prohibited resale. Violating those terms would of course fall under the umbrella of the ToS not allowing violation of the terms of other sites.
Aug 3, 2019 11:50:03 AM Edited Aug 3, 2019 02:15:35 PM by Virginia F
Douglas Michael M wrote:
Petra R wrote:
Sanja D wrote:10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Is that, strictly speaking, against the terms of use? It may be morally reprehensible, but I don't see how it is a ToS violation?
It would depend on the licensing terms of the "free" site, and whether they allowed or prohibited resale. Violating those terms would of course fall under the umbrella of the ToS not allowing violation of the terms of other sites.
Most of those sites allow usage with no need to credit anyone. The problem is that many clients hire freelancers thinking they're getting (and paying) for artwork created especially and specifically for them. If clients knew enough to do a reverse image search, they'd find their logo image in use all over the internet. There are many such portfolio samples on UW. Flagging is useless.
This guy discovered what he paid for was downloaded, though as pointed out in this thread, admittedly he probably got what he paid for. But that does not excuse the practice.
https://community.upwork.com/t5/Freelancers/Time-tracker-in-Fixed-price-contract/m-p/575317#M349539
From that thread: "... I hired one designer and we agreed for original designs. But he is sending me the designs just by downloading it from google. And when I ask for source files then he is unable to submit it saying he does not have. He also admitted that the designs are already online ..."
Aug 3, 2019 12:10:35 PM by Tiffany S
Petra R wrote:
Sanja D wrote:10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Is that, strictly speaking, against the terms of use? It may be morally reprehensible, but I don't see how it is a ToS violation?
Pretty sure there is something in the TOS about not violating applicable law or other legal obligations.
Aug 3, 2019 12:42:12 PM by Sanja D
Tiffany S wrote:
Petra R wrote:
Sanja D wrote:10 days ago I flagged one who was basically selling stock logos (the ones you can download for free from a certain site). then I flagged the profile again 5 days ago.
Surprise - it's still there, happily selling something people can download for free...
Is that, strictly speaking, against the terms of use? It may be morally reprehensible, but I don't see how it is a ToS violation?
Pretty sure there is something in the TOS about not violating applicable law or other legal obligations.
for that particular site - artwork is only licensed for personal use and you must credit the author. you can't sell it as your own original artwork
Aug 4, 2019 12:44:11 AM by Richard L
Petra,
Why do you oppose everything that everyone posts, no matter what it is? The OP was perhaps suggesting that Upwork make better TOS terms. Do you think that is a bad thing?
Aug 3, 2019 06:51:37 AM by Aleksandar D
Hi Isabelle,
Could you please send me a PM with more information about your report? I'll check that for you and escalate to the correct team for further investigation.
Please, check this help article for more information on how to use the flag option to report any inappropriate content.
Thank you.
Aug 3, 2019 07:25:55 AM by Isabelle Anne A
Aleksandar D wrote:Hi Isabelle,
Could you please send me a PM with more information about your report? I'll check that for you and escalate to the correct team for further investigation.
Please, check this help article for more information on how to use the flag option to report any inappropriate content.Thank you.
Thanks for the offer, but there's no point. That original job post that Valeria looked into? It's still up and active; the guy is still hiring, and sent more than 100 further invites since I posted about it. So clearly nothing is being or will be done about these kinds of jobs/clients.
Aug 3, 2019 07:27:46 AM by Mark F
Isabelle Anne A wrote:
Aleksandar D wrote:Hi Isabelle,
Could you please send me a PM with more information about your report? I'll check that for you and escalate to the correct team for further investigation.
Please, check this help article for more information on how to use the flag option to report any inappropriate content.Thank you.
Thanks for the offer, but there's no point. That original job post that Valeria looked into? It's still up and active; the guy is still hiring, and sent more than 100 further invites since I posted about it. So clearly nothing is being or will be done about these kinds of jobs/clients.
Um, Aleksander is offering to look at it and might potentially do something about it. What else do you want from Upwork?
Aug 3, 2019 01:01:47 PM by Isabelle Anne A
Mark F wrote:
Isabelle Anne A wrote:
Aleksandar D wrote:Hi Isabelle,
Could you please send me a PM with more information about your report? I'll check that for you and escalate to the correct team for further investigation.
Please, check this help article for more information on how to use the flag option to report any inappropriate content.Thank you.
Thanks for the offer, but there's no point. That original job post that Valeria looked into? It's still up and active; the guy is still hiring, and sent more than 100 further invites since I posted about it. So clearly nothing is being or will be done about these kinds of jobs/clients.
Um, Aleksander is offering to look at it and might potentially do something about it. What else do you want from Upwork?
No disrepsect to Aleksander, but if Valeria -- one of the most efficient moderators I've come across -- couldn't do anything about an even more spammier job post, nothing will be done about this one.
Individual clients aren't the problem problem here; I had already reported that job post before seeing Aleksander's reply. The reason why I keep updating this thread to show that these are not isolated incidents; they keep happening and are now a trend.
I've come across many more, but have only posted these last two because I'm becoming increasingly frustrated with the way Upwork claims to be "cleaning up" this site when that's not actually the case. So, I'd like a lot more from Upwork than just addressing a couple of job posts (seriously, exactly how are such clients able to send hundreds of invites?). I think it's not unfair to expect a better response now that applying for jobs here is no longer free.
Aug 4, 2019 01:59:11 AM by Maria T
Richard, it would be nice to use "Quote" when you answer someone to find out what you are referring to.
The threads are lengthening and you cannot remember everything that has been written.
Aug 4, 2019 08:28:49 AM by Tonya P
Maria T wrote:Richard, it would be nice to use "Quote" when you answer someone to find out what you are referring to.
The threads are lengthening and you cannot remember everything that has been written.