UPDATE: i recently was asked by maritz to accept this same shop again for a bonus, which i accepted. i was then afterward contacted about the previous visit at the same location where there was a power outage, and notified that i would also be paid for that on top of the revisit. so in effect maritz is now paying me twice for the same location plus the additional bonus.

i wasn't sure what the standard practice was in the mystery shopping industry, but this goes above and beyond professionalism in my personal opinion. they made good on it within a week, but it may have just taken a normal amount of time to process any payment issues. i have always had a good experience with the people at maritz. they are perhaps all the most polite people at a mystery shopping company that i have ever worked with across the board in my personal experience, and i'm not really accepting shops from anyone else right now.



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2012 02:31PM by vince.

I am not sure if this is standard with Maritz but it is with other companies. I went to an address for a jewelry store, after calling (as per). I confirmed the name of the company and asked their hours. As per. Then I drove to said location. I could not find a store but I called the number I had called earlier. I was told where they were located (a the second story of the building, in the rear,or something weird. I was then told they operated by appointment only. I asked for an appointment, saying I wanted to look at a diamond bracelet. I was told I was mistaken, this was not a jewelry store. They confirmed the name and said "oh, we get this all the time." Same name, different place. I called the MSC and they said "no, that's not right." The receptionist called them while I was on hold, came back, and sheepishly said "oops, our bad." I said, "Ok, mistakes happen, how do you want me to debrief this." They told me how to debrief it, but added "we appreciate your help, so this mistake doesn't happen again. Obviously we can't pay you." OMG. Really. All that time in traffic and to not be paid BECAUSE THEY MADE A MISTAKE.

And it goes on and on and on.

I've had a couple of similar situations with Market Force and they paid me for the shops.

jersey07032 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They told me how to debrief it, but added
> "we appreciate your help, so this mistake doesn't
> happen again. Obviously we can't pay you." OMG.
> Really. All that time in traffic and to not be
> paid BECAUSE THEY MADE A MISTAKE.
>

i'm not certain why maritz expected me to debrief a shop which they didn't intend to pay me for. if i had not debriefed it, then they likely would have said that i was in violation. but if i do debrief it, then i am not paid.

should i be expected to debrief a location if i am not going to be paid for it? i'm debriefing for free? should i just refrain from debriefing the shop if i'm not going to be paid for debriefing? the report asks specifically if the location was closed and why. i'm supposed to answer the question about why the location was closed with a narrative, with the assumption that i will not be paid for the debriefing for a closed location in the first place. i'm debriefing for free.

i currently perform about 70 shops for this company per month.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2012 11:36PM by vince.

jersey07032 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not sure if this is standard with Maritz but
> it is with other companies. I went to an address
> for a jewelry store, after calling (as per). I
> confirmed the name of the company and asked their
> hours. As per. Then I drove to said location. I
> could not find a store but I called the number I
> had called earlier. I was told where they were
> located (a the second story of the building, in
> the rear,or something weird. I was then told they
> operated by appointment only. I asked for an
> appointment, saying I wanted to look at a diamond
> bracelet. I was told I was mistaken, this was not
> a jewelry store. They confirmed the name and said
> "oh, we get this all the time." Same name,
> different place. I called the MSC and they said
> "no, that's not right." The receptionist called
> them while I was on hold, came back, and
> sheepishly said "oops, our bad." I said, "Ok,
> mistakes happen, how do you want me to debrief
> this." They told me how to debrief it, but added
> "we appreciate your help, so this mistake doesn't
> happen again. Obviously we can't pay you." OMG.
> Really. All that time in traffic and to not be
> paid BECAUSE THEY MADE A MISTAKE.
>
> And it goes on and on and on.

Sorry, but you were wrong to accept her sayng sorry we cant pay you.
At that point you should have said, "I am an independent contractor. You sent me out on a job and gave me the wrong address. You gave me a company that does not exist, and admitted it. I spent my time and money on gas. You will pay me or you will explain in Court why you haven't.

Thank you."

Same thing for Vince.

I am an Independent Contractor. You sent me out on an assignment. Because of a power outage ./........
However you have still asked me to write a debriefing report, but have not paid me for it. You do owe me for the "debriefing report" YOU REQUESTED.

Kindly pay me for my report, which includes the time and gas I spent on the assignment."

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2012 12:05AM by shoppinalong.

shoppinalong Wrote:
>
> Same thing for Vince.
>
> I am an Independent Contractor. You sent me out on
> an assignment. Because of a power outage
> ./........
> However you have still asked me to write a
> debriefing report, but have not paid me for it.
> You do owe me for the "debriefing report" YOU
> REQUESTED.
>
> Kindly pay me for my report, which includes the
> time and gas I spent on the assignment."

if i do that, then they will cut me and offer me no more work. i will lose $700 per month for the next 10 months to recoup $12.50.

Well Vince,

You appear to be a valued shopper. They give you a lot of business so they
must be very satisfied with your work.

Do you think you might talk to the scheduler's boss and say "she is taking advantage of me. She gave me an address of a company that didnt exist, sent me out there on a wild goose chase, I spent $ ___ on gas and ___hours of my time. She said, OOPS, my mistake, and asked me to send her a debriefing report, then said "but of course we cant pay you."

"This is grossly improper and I would like to be paid for the time and gas and report she asked me for. And could you please assign me to a different scheduler?"

It's up to you Vince.

At the very least you should request a different scheduler, or start refusing any job she's involved in . ...as long as they get away with this they'll keep doing it to you and trying it out on other people also.

I have not been paid for over 5 weeks what I should have been paid for 4 weeks ago. I notified the "paymaster"..unsatisfactory answer and no check.

Then last week I sent an e mail again to the "paymaster" with a blind copy to the scheduler - who called me immediately and was very nice.

the "paymaster" lied to the scheduler that she was sending out the check on the 17th, but emailed me she was sending out the check Friday.

We'll see. But I can tell you if I dont get that check everybody will know about it on EVERY forum, not just this one...and told DONT WORK FOR ________

We have to start demanding what is due us and give them "payback" when they screw us over.

Just as an aside, how much money have they cheated you out of over the time you've been working for them? and do you keep good records?

On Edit:

Maritz and the other one mentioned are two of the companies I think Flash and/or Jacob recommend newbies start with. They should be taken off the list of recommendations in view of their behavior.

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2012 01:06AM by shoppinalong.

Actually, I did attempt to get paid. My post was the 6:00 news version of what happened. When I called to explain the situation, the scheduler, Laurie, kept telling me "she needed me to keep quiet," so she could explain.. Ultimately, her explanation was "we are really sorry but our client will not pay us. Things happen."

I am not sure what else I could do.

I have no recourse. Yes, I can refuse to do shops for the MSC. Obviously I stopped doing shops for that MSC (but they changed their name and I inadvertently took another shop.) As others have said, if I don't do the shop, the MSC just moves on to the next victim/sucker.

And keep in mind, no one is talking about not getting paid for shops we screwed up on (although even that is problematic). We are talking about shops in which we did nothing wrong and are still not paid!!!!


shoppinalong Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jersey07032 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I am not sure if this is standard with Maritz
> but
> > it is with other companies. I went to an
> address
> > for a jewelry store, after calling (as per). I
> > confirmed the name of the company and asked
> their
> > hours. As per. Then I drove to said location. I
> > could not find a store but I called the number
> I
> > had called earlier. I was told where they were
> > located (a the second story of the building, in
> > the rear,or something weird. I was then told
> they
> > operated by appointment only. I asked for an
> > appointment, saying I wanted to look at a
> diamond
> > bracelet. I was told I was mistaken, this was
> not
> > a jewelry store. They confirmed the name and
> said
> > "oh, we get this all the time." Same name,
> > different place. I called the MSC and they said
> > "no, that's not right." The receptionist called
> > them while I was on hold, came back, and
> > sheepishly said "oops, our bad." I said, "Ok,
> > mistakes happen, how do you want me to debrief
> > this." They told me how to debrief it, but
> added
> > "we appreciate your help, so this mistake
> doesn't
> > happen again. Obviously we can't pay you."
> OMG.
> > Really. All that time in traffic and to not be
> > paid BECAUSE THEY MADE A MISTAKE.
> >
> > And it goes on and on and on.
>
> Sorry, but you were wrong to accept her sayng
> sorry we cant pay you.
> At that point you should have said, "I am an
> independent contractor. You sent me out on a job
> and gave me the wrong address. You gave me a
> company that does not exist, and admitted it. I
> spent my time and money on gas. You will pay me
> or you will explain in Court why you haven't.
>
> Thank you."
>
> Same thing for Vince.
>
> I am an Independent Contractor. You sent me out on
> an assignment. Because of a power outage
> ./........
> However you have still asked me to write a
> debriefing report, but have not paid me for it.
> You do owe me for the "debriefing report" YOU
> REQUESTED.
>
> Kindly pay me for my report, which includes the
> time and gas I spent on the assignment."

shoppinalong Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well Vince,
>
> You appear to be a valued shopper. They give you a
> lot of business so they
> must be very satisfied with your work.
>

so long as i don't complain too much. hopefully, it will last for a while at least.

> Do you think you might talk to the scheduler's
> boss and say "she is taking advantage of me. She
> gave me an address of a company that didnt exist,
> sent me out there on a wild goose chase, I spent $
> ___ on gas and ___hours of my time. She said,
> OOPS, my mistake, and asked me to send her a
> debriefing report, then said "but of course we
> cant pay you."
>

you may be mixing up the situation of another poster with mine. the scheduler had no authority in the situation and every employee who i spoke with sympathized with me. the decision not to pay me came from higher up by someone whom i've never spoken to. also, the location did exist but was closed due to a power outage. they used my narrative in the debriefing as the basis not to pay me. in effect, i said that the location was closed due to a power outage.

> "This is grossly improper and I would like to be
> paid for the time and gas and report she asked me
> for. And could you please assign me to a
> different scheduler?"
>

the scheduler was not the one at fault. the scheduler doesn't evaluate my reports nor does she make payments decisions. actually, this particular scheduler is probably the best one that i've ever had with any company in this case.

> Just as an aside, how much money have they cheated
> you out of over the time you've been working for
> them? and do you keep good records?
>

i'm recently keeping better records, so i will at least know in the future.

Shopalong Vince had my post mixed up with yours.


Do you think you might talk to the scheduler's
> boss and say "she is taking advantage of me. She
> gave me an address of a company that didnt exist,
> sent me out there on a wild goose chase, I spent $
> ___ on gas and ___hours of my time. She said,
> OOPS, my mistake, and asked me to send her a
> debriefing report, then said "but of course we
> cant pay you."

a, This happened a long time ago. Before I joined the Forum

b. What's the freakin' use?

jersey07032 Wrote:
long time ago. Before I joined
> the Forum
>
> b. What's the freakin' use?

Well Jersey,

At least give us the name they changed to. So that other shoppers wont sign up with them or let them get away with it.

There's the new consumer agency in Washington DC that Elizabeth Warren set up.(although I dont know the name of it)
Maybe they'd be interested in the abuse of quasi Independent Contractors by
Mystery Shopping Companies.

I worked as an Independent contractor for many years in a different industry.
I was told verbally what was needed, given an address and phone number, no forms to fill out, no demands what to look for,no scenarios and questions to ask, etc etc, and no time limit on when the work had to be done or when a report had to be in. Was paid for my mileage in additon to the day. And no one ever said you didnt get what I or the client wanted so I'm not paying you. Astonishing.

More astonishing that the shoppers who are being cheated out of large amounts dont take the company to small claims court.
Actually, to protect yourselves, you really ought to ask the scheduler to email you what they offer and what you agree to. And save every email.

S.

I thought the name of the MSC WAS Summit, but that might have been the scheduling company. Blame that on my ADD. Sorry for the confusion. The emails changed from Summit to SSS. Again, sorry for the confusion. And it had been a while.

Laurie Hines was the person I dealt with in both negative cases. And, again to be fair, the only person at that company I had any issues with. Still, the experiences were SO negative, I will not shop for them again. No, they will not miss me...but that doesn't affect my decision.

Back to Maritz....I have never had any negative experiences with them. But they have different teams. And each team seems to be a world onto itself. I have had schedulers from one team who were so nice I thought they were planning to adopt me. And schedulers from another team who were polite, but not anywhere as warm and caring.

Vince and Jersey, I have a alternate suggestion. Go the back route. Contact Payroll at Maritz and explain the situation and see what they can do. Don't mention the negativity you have received from the scheduler or whoever told you that you wouldn't be paid.

I have been doing shops for Maritz for nearly five years and I average about 400 per year for them and I have only had three serious complaints of non-payment in those five years. Two of them were resolved by contacting Payroll and explaining the situation (I haven't yet followed up on the third).

My contacts at Payroll are Helen and Rena. Helen can be reached at helen.stone@maritz.com. Rena's email is Rena.Bell-Bila@maritz.com.

Ah good old Secret Shopping Services. It only took them 5 months to pay me. Laurie Hines does no favours to the MSC business with her behaviour. So much so that SSS have been removed from the list of reputable MSC over on the main UK mystery shopping forum due to the time it takes to get paid and her refusal to reply to emails. It sounds like the exact same precious metal client that they shop for over here as well. I will not be working for that MSC again. I can do a bonused burger job for the same money for a fraction of the work involved and get paid in 1 month.

just to be clear...my issues have nothing to do with Maritz. I have had neutral to extremely positive experiences with them with one exception: a ms/audit that took MUCH longer to conduct and debrief than expected. I ran into a number of unanticipated problems and couldn't answer a couple of questions because the directions were vague and/or I am too ADD. I also had technical problems with their system, adding to the time it took to complete the shop. I told them I have done the work to the best of my ability. If they have questions, I am literally unable to answer them. At this point, I am at just about minimum wage. I am not wiling to give this shop any more of my time. I am sure ther will be consequences (ie., I probably won't get paid) but a) I have given it as much as I can/am willing to give. And b) Maritz has never struck me as being vindictive, so I am sure I will get more work from them. In my experience, one department doesn't communicate with the other, so even if I don't get any more shops for client A, I will get more for B, C, D, etc. IF I want them. If they ever call me for client A, I will name my price. They might refuse, but my new policy is to only take shops that pay what I believe they are worth (i.e, what they are worth to me.) If a company will not pay more than what amounts to minimum wage, I will gladly let those who are willing to shop for a pittance do them.

My issues (on this post) concern a scheduler with SSS, with whom I have had to VERY disturbing experiences. I am no longer willing to shop for this company as long as this scheduler, Laurie Hines is there.

None of which is what Vince originally posted about. Vince, if you haven't already...I would talk to accounts payable and/or a supervisor.

PS I posted this before I read birdy's post. birdy I responded below. Thanks for your post.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2012 10:33PM by jersey07032.

shoppinalong Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On Edit:
>
> Maritz and the other one mentioned are two of the
> companies I think Flash and/or Jacob recommend
> newbies start with. They should be taken off the
> list of recommendations in view of their behavior.

There are very strong reasons for including Maritz in any group of companies suggested to beginning shoppers.

1) They offer shops everywhere in the country--that is important to someone just beginning to shop. As any experienced shopper know, only about 20% of the companies you register with ever have anything in your area.
2) They offer clear instructions--because they do the same clients over and over for years on end, most of the instructions have had any conflicting information and vagueness cleared up.
3) They pay in a reasonable period of time--they are neither the fastest nor the slowest but you won't grow old and gray waiting for payment.
4) They require little cash out of pocket to perform--most beginning shoppers have not built a shop kitty to be able to do higher out of pocket jobs, and even if they can afford the out of pocket, they probably should not until they know that their work is on point. It is bad enough to lose your time and effort on a shop, to lose a large reimbursement is infuriating.
5) They are a company that will accept all comers. Some companies will only accept more experienced shoppers and some companies may accept all registrations but then never assign requested shops unless they are desperate to get them done.
6) If you totally screw up and get terminated, they are no great loss.

In full disclosure, I requested that they terminate me several years ago because I was annoyed with the new breed of idiots they were bringing in and tired of the old ladies who attempted to guilt you into taking work. This hearkens back to item 6). With most any 'beginning company' there is a time to take your leave whether you terminate or not. The 'beginning companies' are good to gain experience and see whether mystery shopping is for you, but they tend to pay low and can get snarky.

Based on 1), the companies suggested to new shoppers are CORI, Bare, Maritz and Market Force (blue). Yet if you read the forums you will find the most whining about precisely these four companies (the companies that don't pay on schedule get more than just whining). It is incumbent on any shopper that once they are past the newbie stage they move on from these companies. What they offer is low pay and very repetitive work in exchange for ease of access, clear instructions and prompt pay. There is no growth with these companies, just more of same, and when you stay only with the kindergarten companies you will be treated and paid as a kindergartener. That does not negate the importance of kindergarten.

Good post Flash, especially the very last paragraph.

But I have decided not to mess with any of those companies, even though a newbie,
precisely because of the reported deductions for this and that or non payments.
I would be very angry if I had worked very hard at giving a precise and detailed report and then not paid for no reason at all. And I'd be very likely to do somehing governmental about it.

So far the companies I have done work for have been very very nice, although I can see one editor is going to be a stinker, and others I've applied to have been very pleasant in emails.

So I'm being careful - but still waiting for my over $100 pay which the scheduler said report had been perfect. Thinking the paymaster may just think they can play around with a "newbie". Wrong.

As long as I've got your attention, one of the forum people related a story where they were told, "When we get paid, you'll get paid".

Apparently that is how the mystery shopping companies operate I suspected from the beginning when reading the many stories of delayed or non payment.

That's not how being an Independent Contractor works for any company I've ever heard of, and as I mentioned I worked as an IC for many years in another industry.

Essentially we shoppers are financing the MSC's - I suspect. I'd like to see a contract that a MSC gives to a client and what the payment conditions are. And I'd also like to know if it's true that the MSC client has the right to refuse a report and not pay for it. I suspect that's not true. That there is either a contract where they pay a sum outright, or they pay a sum monthly, but I find it highly doubtful the Client pays by each report!

And I suspect you're right that MSC's submit reports and then tell the shopper it wasn't accepted and then keep the money that would have been paid to the shopper, therefore increasing MSC profit.

What's your take on this please?

Shoppinalong

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2012 07:59PM by shoppinalong.

If/when I suspect a company has used my report and not paid for it I do not work with them further. I have had that sense with only one company aside from a company that went belly up owing me money.

My sense is that many of the companies we work with are seriously under capitalized and my sense is that Maritz, Bare, CORI and Market Force (blue) are not among them. With very little money and some 'borrowed' questionnaires from their shopping days, most anybody could open an MSC, subscribe to one of the software platforms and get schedulers to find them shoppers to fill the jobs. Of course most ICA agreements indicate you will not own or be an employee of another MSC for 2 years after you terminate from a company, but in some states such non-compete clauses aren't worth the paper they are written on. Plus if hubby never signed an ICA the company can be opened in their name and you would not be an 'employee' or 'owner', though you would benefit from any profitability as well as function as an ICA for hubby. If your family net worth is $10k and hubby's MSC is putting out $20k in shops per month you are not going to be able to pay shoppers until you get paid unless you can establish a line of credit with the bank.

We have seen the disappearance or disintegration of a few companies in the past few years due to marital disputes, disputes between partners, infighting in the MSP and even such things as an unexpected medical expense.

The only responsible advice I can give to folks is to start slow and easy, don't have too high expectations, don't lay out a whole lot of money and see how it plays. The big companies place thousands of jobs every month and frankly I have been paid by them for more in the cracks jobs than I have been denied payment. In one Market Force rejected shop I screwed up. In another rejected shop both sides screwed up and I got reimbursed but not paid. With Maritz I had had it with their photo editors and when I also got a scheduler with a head full of rocks I cancelled and terminated. I never had any issue with CORI on shops I was willing to perform. Bare has been a love/hate relationship since I started shopping. But each of these companies I have done a reasonable number of shops with over the years.

I do remember a courageous shopper (and utterly foolish) who took on a restaurant shop as a first shop and another who took on an apartment shop. I gather that for both the follow ups were a bit daunting. It would truly be painful to have a $75 reimbursement shop rejected, which is why usually the companies that offer such do not let beginning shoppers do them.

I suspect that ALL Mscs use the report if it was rejected for minor technical reasons like entering the shop five minutes before or after the stated window. I had a shop rejected for that very same reason. I did not see that shop advertized again. Actually, that was my best report for that shop. And the funny thing is If I had known I would have lied. I stood in line for more than 20 mins.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2012 08:43PM by anakin.

I honestly believe that not all MSCs are that dishonest, anakin. And after a while you figure out those which YOU feel are 'ethically challenged' and don't do work for them in the future. There are bad apples out there, but if I felt they were all rotten to the core I wouldn't be doing shops at all.

I tend to agree with you. I still shop for them - give them one or two more shots. Also, they are accommodating as well. Here I was in error.

birdy

I was walking in the park earlier (70 plus degrees and gorgeous) when I decided to take a break and read my email. I read you post and shouted "Yea!" out loud. Thanks. I feel validated. Not MUCH of a consolation, but it is something. It was a company that specializes in diamonds. The shopper is supposed to ask the rep for a price. If the price is right the rep gets the $50 card and is asked a few other questions. If the rep gives the wrong price, the shopper sends the Amex card back to SSS. Which is tantamount to sending cash in the mail. WhichI refuse to do. I got paid in a timely fashion when I shopped for them in the past. As I said, I have only had two negative experiences with this company and both have been with Laurie Hines and both have been grueling. Come to think of it...I haven't done that many shops for them, maybe 12 all told. So, that is two bad experiences out of 12. That's 16-17% negative. Not a good record.

Nope, no more SSS for me.

birdy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ah good old Secret Shopping Services. It only took
> them 5 months to pay me. Laurie Hines does no
> favours to the MSC business with her behaviour.
> So much so that SSS have been removed from the
> list of reputable MSC over on the main UK mystery
> shopping forum due to the time it takes to get
> paid and her refusal to reply to emails. It sounds
> like the exact same precious metal client that
> they shop for over here as well. I will not be
> working for that MSC again. I can do a bonused
> burger job for the same money for a fraction of
> the work involved and get paid in 1 month.

tanmanlovespool Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Contact Payroll at Maritz and
> explain the situation and see what they can do.

actually, when i had contacted payroll to see if the invoice for the shop had been properly processed, it was the payroll department who informed me that i would not be paid for the shop.

> Don't mention the negativity you have received
> from the scheduler or whoever told you that you
> wouldn't be paid.
>

again, i reiterate that the scheduler expressed absolutely no negativity whatsoever. she is the best scheduler whom i have ever had with any company. someone had just assumed that the scheduler was bad, but i never made any reference against the scheduler. my particular scheduler is perhaps the most polite person whom i have ever worked with. she bends over backward for me.

furthermore, every employee at maritz who has dealt directly with me has also been exceedingly polite, and none of them suggested that i ever did anything wrong. they simply informed me that i would not be paid for the shop, because i did not actually sit with a personal banker, despite the fact that the building doors were locked shut due to a power outage.

i was told that the client would not be willing to accept the report due to insufficient information, although the report program restricted the upload of packet materials which i had obtained from the bank teller through the drive-up window. if the client does not pay maritz for the shop, then maritz does not pay the shopper for the shop. in effect, they blamed the client for non-payment of the shop.

> I have been doing shops for Maritz for nearly five
> years and I average about 400 per year for them
> and I have only had three serious complaints of
> non-payment in those five years. Two of them were
> resolved by contacting Payroll and explaining the
> situation (I haven't yet followed up on the
> third).
>

i've never encountered problems with any other shop with them.

> My contacts at Payroll are Helen and Rena. Helen
> can be reached at helen.stone@maritz.com. Rena's
> email is Rena.Bell-Bila@maritz.com.

i had already contacted payroll, and i was instructed from the payroll representative that i would not be paid due to insufficient information in the report. since the client would not be willing to accept the report due to insufficient information, therefore maritz would not be willing to pay me for the visit. this is despite the fact that i offered to upload the packet materials, but the report program restricted the upload because i did not physically sit with the banker. the report program assumes that i sat with a banker in order for the package materials to be uploaded. if i did not physically sit with a banker, then the upload of packet materials is restricted.

If they required you call ahead and you did so, then there should be some compensation for your time and effort. Similarly if there is no reference made to a call ahead and you went during the hours you were required to go, some compensation for your time and effort is called for. Going back to do the shop again should not be your 'reward' for having gone the first time. The bank can verify readily enough if the branch was closed at the time you state you went there. It may not be a full fee they pay, but they do need to compensate you for your time and efforts.

I would have changed my answer about sitting with a banker in order to submit the material. Then I would have written in the section that asks if there is anything else that was not covered that can be added and let them know what the situation was.

I know they want to know if the bank is "physically" open, but I would have affirmed that it was, where/how I got the material and then went from there just to see what their response would be.


vince Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maritz has refused to pay me for a combo bank shop
> visit, because it was closed due to a power
> outage. is this standard? it was my impression
> that i would still be paid for a shop visit even
> if the location is closed when i physically
> arrive.
>
> it was a combo shop. first i called in for a
> packet of materials. then on a later day, i
> visited the shop on my route (about 1pm) an hour
> away with 8 other shops that day. when i arrived,
> the employees were exiting the building and
> entering their vehicles due to a power outage.
> there were signs all over the building saying that
> the bank was closed due to a power outage. the
> doors were locked. two employees exiting the
> building informed me that the power outage would
> last for about 5 more hours. i then drove through
> the teller area, and was luckily able to speak
> with a teller who gave me a packet of materials
> upon my request.
>
> when i proceeded to upload the report and the
> materials, the maritz questionnaire program would
> not allow me to upload the materials, because i
> did not actually sit with a banker. i was
> afterward informed that i would not be paid for
> the shop because i had provided insufficient
> materials in the report. despite the fact that i
> have the materials, but the program would not
> allow me to upload them because i did not actually
> sit with a banker.
>
> i was given opportunity to visit the shop again
> when it is open again, but my schedule is so
> booked now at the end of the month that this is
> impossible. plus, the shop is about an hour away
> and i normally only travel that far if there are
> other shops on the route as was the case
> originally.
>
> so i guess that i'm not getting paid for the shop.
> is this the standard?
>
> -
>
> i'm not certain why maritz expected me to debrief
> a shop which they didn't intend to pay me for. if
> i had not debriefed it, then they likely would
> have said that i was in violation. but if i do
> debrief it, then i am not paid.
>
> should i be expected to debrief a location if i am
> not going to be paid for it? i'm debriefing for
> free? should i just refrain from debriefing the
> shop if i'm not going to be paid for debriefing?
> the report asks specifically if the location was
> closed and why. i'm supposed to answer the
> question about why the location was closed with a
> narrative, with the assumption that i will not be
> paid for the debriefing for a closed location in
> the first place. i'm debriefing for free.
>
> i currently perform about 70 shops for this
> company per month.

I have put on a Maritz report that I did not sit down with a banker. I didn't. It was the Friday before a major holiday weekend, I was there around 5 pm and the banker went home "sick" around 3. They only had one banker scheduled. I stood and talked with a branch manager infront of a teller window. I put it in my report and was paid.

There have been several times I have not sat with a "banker". I have sat with branch managers many times. I have always put NO and always been paid.

I am truly baffled why they are not paying you for the shop when you were there. It wasn't your fault for the closure. They susually work with shoppers on this type of thing. I wonder what is going on there.

I was just about to post something similar. I did two shops for H/C this week. I was supposed to see a teller AND a loan officer at each branch of a bank. After doing the teller portion of the shop at the second branch, found out at they don't have a loan officer on site. She "visits" from the first branch! Rather than throw the whole shop out H/C is paying me half. (GOT to remember to send in that dang invoice!!!) I am disappointed I am not getting my full fee. And I could argue (with the wind!) it is not my fault the branch doesn't have a loan officer. But, given what we deal with on a regular basis, half price is a decent compromise. And since H/C pays so well, half is not bad. $20 for 40 minutes of work, including driving back and forth. Also recently did a shop for Palm. The place was closed. I took the required exterior pics and explained in the report that I had called ahead yada yada. Again, not my fault. But, I am getting paid half. Not ideal, but I will take it. Seems Maritz'payroll people are being rather arbitrary and punitive. I am not going on a rant about Maritz but this is definitely not right.




Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If they required you call ahead and you did so,
> then there should be some compensation for your
> time and effort. Similarly if there is no
> reference made to a call ahead and you went during
> the hours you were required to go, some
> compensation for your time and effort is called
> for. Going back to do the shop again should not
> be your 'reward' for having gone the first time.
> The bank can verify readily enough if the branch
> was closed at the time you state you went there.
> It may not be a full fee they pay, but they do
> need to compensate you for your time and efforts.

Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If they required you call ahead and you did so,
> then there should be some compensation for your
> time and effort.

they've chosen not to pay me for my call ahead, on the basis that the client is not willing to pay them for a complete shop.

> Similarly if there is no
> reference made to a call ahead and you went during
> the hours you were required to go, some
> compensation for your time and effort is called
> for.

they have denied compensation for the actual visit as well.

> Going back to do the shop again should not
> be your 'reward' for having gone the first time.

they offered to pay me only if i were to return to the location and sit down with a banker. however, i have committed to other work assignments which prohibit me from returning in a timely fashion. also, the location is nearly an hour away, and i prefer only to travel that distance if one a route with other shops.

> The bank can verify readily enough if the branch
> was closed at the time you state you went there.

correct. even maritz can verify that the branch was closed at that time by a simple phone call.

> It may not be a full fee they pay, but they do
> need to compensate you for your time and efforts.

they have expressed that they do not need to compensate me if the client does not compensate them.

SoCal Shopper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would have changed my answer about sitting with
> a banker in order to submit the material.

i tried answering the question that way also, but the uploads were then restricted and the report still required me to give the banker's name.

> Then I
> would have written in the section that asks if
> there is anything else that was not covered that
> can be added and let them know what the situation
> was.
>

there is not a section to add comments in the report. therefore, i sent a separate email regarding the report, but it was not directly responded to.

> I know they want to know if the bank is
> "physically" open, but I would have affirmed that
> it was, where/how I got the material and then went
> from there just to see what their response would
> be.
>

again, there was not a narrative box in the report to include this information. therefore, i sent an email but received no direct response.

SecretAgentMom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have put on a Maritz report that I did not sit
> down with a banker. I didn't. It was the Friday
> before a major holiday weekend, I was there around
> 5 pm and the banker went home "sick" around 3.
> They only had one banker scheduled. I stood and
> talked with a branch manager infront of a teller
> window. I put it in my report and was paid.
>

i have been informed by maritz that i am not being paid because i did not physically sit with a banker.

> There have been several times I have not sat with
> a "banker". I have sat with branch managers many
> times. I have always put NO and always been paid.
>

i was not allowed to answer that question since i had mentioned that the location was closed. the doors were locked. the question was disabled.

> I am truly baffled why they are not paying you for
> the shop when you were there. It wasn't your fault
> for the closure.

they say that the client will not pay them for an incomplete shop, and therefore they will not pay me.

> They susually work with shoppers
> on this type of thing. I wonder what is going on
> there.

i spoke with three different people from three different departments. all three explained to me that i would not be paid because the client would not pay them for incomplete information. i talked with the payroll department, with the scheduler and with a supervisor. they all told me that the shop was incomplete because i did not sit with a personal banker as per shop guidelines and that the client would not pay them for an incomplete shop. therefore they will not pay me.