perpetual scammy job invitations

[jojomo]

For the past 3-4 days, I've been getting literally bombarded with the same job invitation (different client name and location but same job description) that are obviously a scam or that do not meet UpWork TOS because seconds/minutes after being posted they get taken down. These client invites are getting to be EXTREMELY annoying and even bordering on harassment at this point because sometimes I'm getting 2-3 of the same scammy invite every hour. Is there nothing Upwork can do about this??? I'm using connects to get LEGIT invites so I do not wish to turn off my notifications, yet I am ending up with constant scammy invitations? I have literally gotten at least 30+ of the same invitation over the past few days and that's unacceptable.

Why aren't new clients being profiled better? If freelancers are required to spend their hard-earned connects on getting legitimate invitations every week, I don't think it's fair for us freelancers to have to deal with potentially scammy clients...  Clients should have to go through a series of steps to confirm their identity as well and their method of payment before being able to send invitations to freelancers. I expect to get quality job invitations if I am to pay for them. It takes time and effort out of our busy schedule for us to draft a tailored proposal every time we get a job invite but at this point I'm wondering why even bother?

[the-right-writer]

"Why aren't new clients being profiled better?"

Upwork does no profiling, vetting, checking, or verifying of clients.

[jojomo]

**Edited for Community Guidelines** I'm saying they should.

[colettelewis]

In other threads, the argument against verifying clients has been that it will frighten clients away. I'm not so sure it would, and I am  wondering if this belief should not be reviewed.  In view of how the internet works these days,  most bona fide clients have a good (even if  modest) online presence, so a genuine client should not mind having to prove who he or she is.

I'm beginning to believe too, that the reason why Upwork does not do this, is because it would be too expensive to hire the staff to implement even the scantiest verification.  

My conclusion is that many genuine clients may be giving Upwork a miss precisely because they do not want to be painted with the same brush as the sort of fraudsters posing as clients who are giving Upwork such an unsavoury reputation (and this is not even touching on the sort of freelancer, who has never had a job let alone being suitable for remote work).

Just a thought ...  

[renata101]

---

Nichola L wrote:

In other threads, the argument against verifying clients has been that it will frighten clients away. I'm not so sure it would, and I am  wondering if this belief should not be reviewed.  In view of how the internet works these days,  most bona fide clients have a good (even if  modest) online presence, so a genuine client should not mind having to prove who he or she is.

I'm beginning to believe too, that the reason why Upwork does not do this, is because it would be too expensive to hire the staff to implement even the scantiest verification.  

My conclusion is that many genuine clients may be giving Upwork a miss precisely because they do not want to be painted with the same brush as the sort of fraudsters posing as clients who are giving Upwork such an unsavoury reputation (and this is not even touching on the sort of freelancer, who has never had a job let alone being suitable for remote work).

Just a thought ...  

---

My main concern is that Upwork would approach client verification in the same way they do everything else.

I'm with you in thinking that clients might not mind some form of unintrusive verification. You have to submit to some kind of process to do most things these days.  It makes me wonder if there's a way to ask them.

[a_lipsey]

It depends. Do they want to verify by, say, connecting a LinkedIn account? I mean, it would have to be automated and fast. I'm a client and an employer. I've hired freelancers and employees. If I'm going to have to provide my driver's license and a articles of incorporation and a bunch of other stuff just to post a job and talk to someone? Yeah, no, I'll go elsewhere. 

And then what do you say to a client who needs a job quickly turned around, like in a day or so? But oh well, verification takes a few days so not going to post that job on Upwork. 

It does actually pose quite a few hurdles for clients. It would slow down business substantially, especially if you can't hire the staff to make the process quick and seamless. And we know that's not a strong suit of Upwork's. Most of my clients are new to the platform, and say "oh I thought I'd try Upwork out." And you can bet they would have gone some other route if it had asked too much of them just to have a conversation with a potential hire. 

[roberty1y]

Totally agree. I often see jobs where the client wants someone right away - they want a job completed and reviewed in less than 24 hours. That's one of the reasons people hire freelancers in the first place. You can get hold of one immediately and have them working for you within minutes of posting the job.

And verification processes are often prone to glitches and unforeseen delays - just what you want if your site has been hacked and you need someone to start fixing it right now.

[pgiambalvo]

Yeah, valid points from you and Amanda. But still... Why not at least a "valid" photo ID? And another thought about the cost: all companies have to find ways of imrpoving their goods or services without it leading to increased costs to their customers. Adding people to help verify clients (or even if they don't do that) adding them to better monitor and filter the posts shouldn't be blamed any more than them needing to hire more IT, marketing, or janitors to improve things.

[feed_my_eyes]

Scammers have access to all kinds of fake IDs - numerous freelancers here have reported that "clients" required them to send a copy of their passport or driver's license, and they handed it over without a second thought. Like taking candy from a baby. So Upwork would also need to do a video verification, which many new clients simply won't agree to. Think of what you're asking. Imagine you're a client and you have an important deadline, so you decide to try out this Upwork thing. Before you can post a job, they ask you to scan your ID, then set up a time for a video call.  You're a busy person who has meetings all day - why is this website treating you like a potential scammer and making you jump through hoops before you've even decided whether you want to buy anything? 

And we know how long it can take for a customer service person to get back to you - you really think that a client won't be put off if they have to wait days to become verified so that they can post a job? 

I also think that a scammer could get past the video verification if they really wanted to. Scammers already have no trouble at all finding dumb and/or dishonest freelancers who are willing to give them fake reviews, or post bogus rental properties under their own names, or publish scam apps using their own accounts, or accept shipments to their home address. I bet they could also find freelancers who would upload their IDs and do a brief video call in return for 10 bucks or so.  

In conclusion, you're wasting your time asking for client verification. It's not going to happen.

[pgiambalvo]

All that is probably true but at least make these **edited for Community Guidelines** jump through some hoops. And the ID thing would at least make them to have to keep coming up with fake ones every time they open a new account instead of just using a different email address.

[a_lipsey]

---

Peter G wrote:

All that is probably true but at least make these **edited for Community Guidelines** jump through some hoops. And the ID thing would at least make them to have to keep coming up with fake ones every time they open a new account instead of just using a different email address.

---

Have you ever heard the phrase: cut of your nose to spite your face?

[pgiambalvo]

Yes, and that's why I don't have a nose anymore.

[pgiambalvo]

Please, just something, anything, would help. Please?

[a_lipsey]

---

Peter G wrote:

Please, just something, anything, would help. Please?

---

You don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. And that's what this suggestion is doing. Verifying by linking a phone number or social profile would likely be simple. It still could be faked, but potentially simple from the client side to do. But again, it can still be faked, so it may not decrease the spam/scam as much as you think. 

[the-right-writer]

I do not believe clients would be offended, freaked out, or run away in terror if they had to verify their email. You don't even need a person. Hire some real tech people to create a program. No, it isn't much, but it would be something to get rid of some of the thieves, and it would cost virtually nothing. Do other freelancers really think this is such an awful thing to ask people?

[feed_my_eyes]

How would it help to verify an email address? Scammers have email accounts and can easily respond to a verification email. Some have even gone to the trouble of setting up fake websites with their email addresses on them. 

[pgiambalvo]

Clients should have to go through a series of steps to confirm their identity as well and their method of payment before being able to send invitations to freelancers.  YES!!!

[12a912ee]

---

Peter G wrote:

Clients should have to go through a series of steps to confirm their identity as well and their method of payment before being able to send invitations to freelancers.  YES!!!

---

Totally agree 100%

[lizablau]

No they should not. 

[a_lipsey]

---

Peter G wrote:

Clients should have to go through a series of steps to confirm their identity as well and their method of payment before being able to send invitations to freelancers.  YES!!!

---

Peter, why do you support this? You, as admitted elsewhere, have never had a problem getting paid or had a fraudulent client. You know how to vet clients, and you are a successful freelancer. Why do you support making it harder for YOU to get clients just so newbies don't have to use common sense and read the TOS? 

[roberty1y]

You can use the search filter to exclude clients whose payment method hasn't been verified. You can also filter by client history, only showing clients who have hired more than 10 freelancers. That would pretty much exclude all scammers.

[roberty1y]

.

[m_terrazas]

---

Robert Y wrote:

.

---

Did you run out of words? 😉

[roberty1y]

No, I posted a reply to myself that was intended for Renata's post. 😉

[renata101]

Yeah, that's okay. As everyone knows, really skilled editors can read your mind.

[the-right-writer]

Verified payment doesn't help. I have had many clients that were excellent who didn't have verification until the contract. Verification works great too for the thieves. I think it gives freelancers a false sense of protection because they think there is real money in escrow. It is esentially and IOU from a total stranger.

[renata101]

---

Joëlle O wrote:

Why aren't new clients being profiled better?

---

Hi Joëlle, 

Clients on Upwork aren't screened and they never have been (that's been true since before Upwork was Upwork). It's designed as a marketplace, and in that way, it's similar to eBay. This means you need to vet clients and jobs in the same way you need to look carefully at products and sellers on eBay to avoid disappointing experiences. I'm not defending this, it's just the way it is, and it's probably the way it is on most other platforms. I imagine the fees would be incredibly high if Upwork put a lot of time into vetting every client who posts here.

The number of scammers who currently populate the platform is a drag, but you can flag the posts and move on.

---

If freelancers are required to spend their hard-earned connects on getting legitimate invitations every week, I don't think it's fair for us freelancers to have to deal with potentially scammy clients... 

---

Connects are like 15 cents each. If you can't factor that into the cost of doing business, you might want to rethink freelancing or freelancing on this platform. As far as I understand it, connects were implimented as a way to limit the number of people applying to jobs, otherwise, people sometimes apply to postings indescriminantly. The connects charge (sometimes) tends to make people stop and consider the jobs they're applying to more carefully, apply to postings that are realistically a match for their experience and skills, and submit more thoughtful proposals.

I work in an area that is typically oversaturated with freelancers, and I remember it was like before Upwork implemented this.

---

I expect to get quality job invitations if I am to pay for them. It takes time and effort out of our busy schedule for us to draft a tailored proposal every time we get a job invite but at this point I'm wondering why even bother?

---

Why to even bother is up to you to decide. Realistically, finding freelance jobs sometimes does take time out of your day. What doesn't? If you don't have the time to invest, perhaps you should reconsider freelancing or reconsider freelancing on this platform.

If you don't like the work involved, perhaps you could hire your own personal client recruiter? One thing I can tell you is that Upwork has made it possible for me to connect with clients I never would have been able to reach. I get automatic invoicing and payment protection. This beats the heck out of doing my own invoicing and the job of having to track of who's paying them.

[roberty1y]

I imagine the fees would be incredibly high if Upwork put a lot of time into vetting every client who posts here.

So we'd pay more in commission, and also have fewer honest clients, as more of them would be put off by the process of being approved by Upwork. That's why vetting is such an awful idea.

[renata101]

Well, having been personally vetted by Upwork on more than a few occasions, I was a bit put off by the whole idea. 

I guess if you're spending money to get projects done rather than making money from doing them, it's probably even more offputting.

[pgiambalvo]

I don't get why so many people think that better vetting automatically means higher fees for us. The vetting infratructure for freelancers already exists, just roll clients into it as well. And why would clients be more off-put by having to go through this than freelancers are? They need to hire someone so they'd do what it takes. And I think the good clients would be much more willing than the bad ones, which would help weed the losers and scammers out. We all share personal info all the time for almost everything we do nowadays. You just have to. I mean, how hard is it for a client to upload proof of identity?

[a_lipsey]

Peter, you can do math. If you roll clients into verification you're adding work burden to existing human resources and therefore have to hire more people, which costs more money, which they aren't going to take out of their zero net profit, so of course fees will go up. Also, they only verify freelancers who make money. They don't verify freelancers who send proposals - only those that win jobs and make money. 

[pgiambalvo]

Do you think the money they'd save buy not having to pay as much under payment protection offset the cost of weeding out those bad clients that force them to pay out for that? And maybe they could also only vet the clients who actually hire people?

[a_lipsey]

---

Peter G wrote:

Do you think the money they'd save buy not having to pay as much under payment protection offset the cost of weeding out those bad clients that force them to pay out for that? And maybe they could also only vet the clients who actually hire people?

---

No because you are talking about two different things. 

This thread is about spam/scam posts. And your equation of payment protection to spam/scam posts is a false logic. Most of those are trying to get you off platform, where Upwork has no loss in terms of the fraud that takes place. And even on Upwork clients can still default on payments easily after being vetted. I had a paying client have their card declined because their funds were low once. The losses of payment protection are not necessarily related to spam invites. They are due to chargebacks after freelancers who suck try to pass off poor work and the client has to pay out regardless. Chargebacks can happen even with the vetting you propose. But we aren't talking about chargebacks or payment protection, we are talking about spam job posts. 

To your second question, vetting clients after they hire does nothing to decrease spam job posts either. 

[the-right-writer]

Do you think verifying an email is going to raise costs to that extent?

[roberty1y]

But verifying an email address is no use. Full vetting would involve:

• Having a video call.
• Making them show ID.
• Verifying their email and phone number.
• Ensuring their credit cards or other forms of payment are their own.
• Checking for dubious activity on the site by the same client in the past.

And after all of this, there is not much that can be done if a client turns out to be a scammer. They're almost always beyond the jurisdiction of law enforcement. All you could do is stop them from coming back, assuming they don't acquire fake ID and credit cards in the meantime.

[the-right-writer]

I never suggested a full-scale investigation. However, I have been involved in a variety of platforms and job boards. Verifying email does indeed get rid of many scammers; I have seen it work. Yes, the scammers will still exist but not as many, and you don't even need a person. A cheap, easily established automatic program is all you need.

I'm not looking to punish the scammers. That would be great, but I don't have that kind of power. I am looking at the never-ending flood of scams that can and can't be filtered. Verifying emails does eliminate some of the scammers. I am all for a simple, cheap, effective way to eliminate any scams.

[roberty1y]

I always assumed you did have to verify your email to be a client. I wouldn't know, because my client and freelancer accounts are together. But I don't see how verifying an email would stop even one scammer. It takes only minutes to start an email account. 

I don't think the scams affect people who are regular freelancers on the site. But over 1000 people a day are apparently joining up. It's almost exclusively from among these newcomers with no earnings and no knowledge of the rules that the scammers find their victims.

The scams only affect the rest of us in that they're clogging up the job feed with stupid fake jobs. But that would all disappear if new arrivals on the site would just learn not to contact anyone off the site. Also that you don't pay money to work, the client pays you.

[jojomo]

Renata,

**Edited for Community Guidelines** I have been freelancing on Upwork since way before they changed their name to Upwork (oDesk) and I more than familiar with the way they function and with my freelancing business, thank you **Edited for Community Guidelines**

Maybe you have the time to deal with countless same scammy job invitations (10+ a day) but please don't speak for everyone as if they're all sitting on their behinds waiting to get invited. Time is money for me and I simply don't have time to SIFT through scammy invites when I'm PAYING for them. Whether connects are 15 cents or 1 dollars is completely irrelevant!!! From the moment, they have implemented this new rule, it is their responsibility (Upwork's) to make sure clients are legitimate and that my email isn't being filled with SPAM. I don't care how it's done - that's up to Upwork to make that call, they provide a service and I'm providing feedback as a freelancer. What's wrong with that? 

And regarding the idea that it would scare clients away... that doesn't even make sense to me. Upwork has been around and growing for years and is a trusted freelance platform - if clients are legitimate and not out to scam or deceive anyone, they shouldn't have a reason to be scared to answer a few questions. The process doesn't have to take long and doesn't have to involve a video call - it just needs to be done to ensure that freelancers are NOT wasting their time. It works both ways and is a fair request - i'm not into double standards.

[pgiambalvo]

Yep.

[a_lipsey]

Invites are free.