Interesting philosophical discussion I must say, especially a statement Preston made about the law:
The more a society depends on laws to force its citizens to behave properly, the less moral that society actually is.
The counter argument is that in a society without laws, might makes right and the strong impose their will on the weak while the weak can turn the other cheek and hope to be rewarded in the afterlife.
re: "The counter argument is that in a society without laws, might makes right and the strong impose their will on the weak while the weak can turn the other cheek and hope to be rewarded in the afterlife."
You make an excellent point here.
But I would add that when I point out that a society which is forced to do the right thing by law is less moral than a society which does the right thing without being forced to do so at the point of a gun (or forced for fear of imprisonment, fine, etc.), this is NOT the same thing as *advocating* having no law.
In no way am I an anarchist. I don't beleive that society in general or Upwork specifically should be without law.
I'm not really a "pure libertarian," either. But I do believe that as much as possible, implementing rules which respect freedom and libertarian principles benefit society more than trying to micro-manage everything based on one narrow individual ethos.
The very specific example being discussed: I have hired individuals on Upwork and never have I expressed a preference for contractors having a specific geographic location. But I strongly support Upwork continuing to allow doing so.
There are reasons both moral and immoral that prompt clients to specify geographic preferences for contractors in their job postings. I don't believe the negative repercussions that might arise from allowing this freedom outweigh the benefits of supporting freedom in general and allowing for this practice specifically (which is actually quite limited).
Another example: I would never drink alcohol, but I strongly support Upwork allowing job postings that ask illustrators to create advertising for alcohol.
I absolutely do think Upwork should be able to have and enforce whatever rules it wants to. So I don't think Upwork should allow unfettered freedom with regards to job postings. But I strongly advocate the libertarian principle that Upwork should be allowed to make its rules and practices with a minimum of government intervention, being governed their sense of morality and ethics and their response to free market economics. I understand and accept the need for SOME laws that apply to Upwork, but the fewer laws and restrictions they face, the more they will be able to innovate and the less expensive their operations will be.
Individual citizens benefit more from being able to work for or create companies which thrive and are efficient. Countries and jurisdictions which, through micro-management and over-regulation, stifle the ability of companies to thrive, find their economies stagnate relative to places where companies have greater freedom, lower tax burdens, and less bureaucracy.
@Preston H wrote:
I strongly advocate the libertarian principle that Upwork should be allowed to make its rules and practices with a minimum of government intervention, being governed their sense of morality and ethics and their response to free market economics.
Let me know how that corporate morality and ethics thing works out for you. My reading of both history and current events leaves me rather more cynical.
I appreciate the effort and thought gone into the discussion. Upwork already has a minimum $3/hr for all jobs and I am fine with that. The thread started with the OP showing $1 per article post. Therefore clients are using fixed contract prices to get the same ridiculous $0.50/hr jobs as before.
There is little Upwork can do about this manipulation without much change and effort, and as was mentioned in the thread freelancers can dictate what they will not work for - so advice is key. From my experience, Upwork does listen, but things don't and cant change overnight. The more money a client spends, the more money Upwork makes, so they would always be in favour or higher rates. Furthermore Upwork is not an employer.
Never assume posts in this forum go unnoticed. Many thing occur behind the scenes which were generated from threads here. And many contributors here have also contributed in a tangible way outside of this forum.
I wont comment further - on what was a rant of a thread
re: "And I was not referring to laws of the land. We are discussing common practices on the platform."
I completely agree with you on this. Upwork practices and Upwork rules are what should be discussed here.
Preston, thanks for clarifying your position regarding law versus morality. As to the point you raised regarding Upwork policy -- Clients should be allowed to express a preference for contractors based on where they live. Where a person lives is not the same as national origin -- I concur. The policy in question specifies 'national origin'; while this term might be open to interpretation, my reading is that it refers to one's birthplace and not place of residence.
I agree with you.
I am honestly not thinking about any specific post or person when I say this, but I have a sense that some people have objected to job posts which express geographic preference on the grounds that such postings violate Upwork's written policy about national origin.
I think where a person lives is different than a person's national origin, and clearly Upwork has a written policy about one, and clearly allows job postings that indicate the other.
I don't want to seem legalistic. But I don't see a contradiction or problem here. I think this is a very minor issue, really, given the fact that such a small percentage of job posts express any geographic preference at all.
I do not feel that expressing geographic preferences is inappropriate. There are often valid reasons. These reasons can be things such as "I want to work with people who know the region I'm targeting for marketing" and even "I want my company to earn more money."
My ideal would be that Upwork has no policy at all about inappropriate discrimination in job postings, and that no client wants to express inappropriate discrimination in job postings, and thus such a policy would be entirely unnecessary.
I sincerely believe if the previously quoted policy about inappropriate discrimination in job postings were removed from Upwork's website entirely, and if Upwork job posting reviewers stopped looking for such, that there would BE NO CHANGE IN THE CONTENT and nature of job postings.
Getting back to the original post about shockingly low RFPs. This has nothing to do with location. I believe every client is fed with the belief that they can get work for nothing. I have just seen a post in one of my categories, French to English translation for a resume for $7 (client is in France). It costs more than that per hour just to read it.
The requirements for this amazing offer are an attractively designed and professional resumé, plus a portfolio that can uphold your bid and an overall rating of 4.5.
$7 minus 10% wow! - I'm definitely going for this one.