I think there should be some restriction while posting jobs on oDesk for clients with unverified payment method. I had seen clients with unverified payment method who had posted 20 jobs with no hires. I think these clients are looking for free work by interviewing newcomers and scamming them. I know that the new clients will not verify their payment method until they feel confident and comfortable using the oDesk platform. But after posting a few jobs on oDesk even if there are hires or no hires, there should be mandatory verification of payment method required and if they don’t verify their payment method then they should be restricted from posting jobs on oDesk. I also think oDesk should not allow clients with unverified payment method to hire someone. I hope oDesk staff will consider my view on this topic. I also welcome any suggestions/comments on this topic from other talented freelancers.
I am new to ODesk & pleased with the my first project is going.
Here are my thoughts:
1. Screen your clients. Some clients aren't worth the time.
2. Perhaps there should be a classification system so that
wedding photographers don't apply for edgy music videos.
3. If the customer doesn't know what they are doing they have two choices:
a. educate themselves about the project and project management
b. Hire someone, give them reasonable guidance (I like this
restaurant ad) and trust the freelancer to do a good job.
I find not yelling at people helpful.
4. Consider a flat fee.
Hey- before I ask someone for twenty hours of their time I have money on deposit.
That's called respect and honesty.
Don't get played by some loser.....
There already IS a restriction on client with unverified payment method.
It's called: "If you don't want to work for a client with unverified, payment, don't apply for their job."
I do not agree to the suggestion provided by OP. Clients should not be restricted from window shopping until they feel confident that they have found the contractor that is fit for their job.
I do however feel that if a certain client(Verified or Not) and his job postings are being reported or flagged continuously, he should be investigated(just like freelancers are reviewed and suspended) and odesk should take strict action against reported scammers. I know it is contractor's responsibility to protect himself and not be "played by some loser" as mentioned in suggestions. However if such scammers are left unchecked , they are soon going to get better at their games. Few months back, I was also very smart about filtering out bad clients and I do not mind if a client runs away with a few dollars or hours of work but I have recently been through a bad experience on odesk(Not scammed) and can now feel the rants of other freelancers. May be things are all sunshine for Pamela and Preston for now and I strongly wish that they remain the same but I do feel that if odesk does not pick their act soon, more and more freelancers will run into issues with bad clients. This is specially bad if someone is new to odesk as they are the ones most prone to make mistakes and may end up spoiling their profile even before getting properly started on odesk.
From what I can get from this thread is that oDesk must find a way restrict clients who have no verified payment method.
Let's say, client with no verified payment method can just post their job offerings once or twice, but after they get a taste of the qualities of the freelancers they're getting, they cannot post anymore job offers until they put in a verified payment method.
This way you can save both the employer and the freelencer's time in filling out useless job offers that will not have the possibility of hiring you or anyone for that matter because of their unverified payment status.
Hi Aseem, my suggestion in the original post was only to restrict the clients with unverified payment method, not for the clients with verified payment method. I agree with your suggestion that the clients should not be restricted from window shopping until they feel confident that they have found the freelancer that is fit for their job, but not for the clients with unverified payment method. I know the things should not be same for the clients and the freelancers, but as a new freelancer, our job application quota is restricted and which keeps on increasing depending on whether we have passed oDesk Readiness Test and other skill tests. Similarly, I think the same kind of restriction on job posting should be applied for the clients with unverified payment method and after they verify their payment method then there should not be any restrictions on job posting.
There definitely needs to be some restrictions on clients' ability to post new jobs.
I am not certain, but after a client's particular payment method is verified for the first time, if that payment method becomes no longer valid, then, "Payment Method Not Verified" is reapplied to the client's account (Denoted in job searches by a rectangle with a dash in the center of it). If that is true, then, I suggest that any payment method related restriction be applied only to the need for the initial payment verification before posting of any new jobs. My reasoning is that payment methods becoming invalid could be the fault of the client or due to issues whereby the client is not at fault.
Now, with regard to job postings, what things should clients not be allowed to do?
Here's one of many: There is already a metric, that is, data regarding client "jobs posted" versus percent "hire rate." Data is also readily available to oDesk regarding client total payments over time, which is a strong indication of a client's "worth" to the marketplace.
I suggest that the data available be used to establish criteria preventing clients from posting an excessive number of new jobs that essentially do not result in any hires. That's just one of many bad practices exhibited by clients for a variety of reasons.
Maybe when the Community "Idea Exchange" feature is released for use, these issues can be discussed further in an attempt to formulate a proposal [request] to oDesk to take action regarding bad practices deployed by clients, which are of no real value to the majority of the membership and oDesk's revenues.
Edited 01/09/2015 RT/lwm