Ladies and Gentlemen of the Shopping persuasion:

I am wondering if there is anything I can/should do about a recent trend I have noticed from an independent scheduler. There are shops for a certain flapping piece of chicken anatomy (hopefully "formerly flapping" by the time we get to it!) that pay $5 plus reimbursement, and usually call for shoppers younger than I. Two days ago, however, I got an email for a geezer-approved, late-night shop with "$25 shop pay." I thought that would be worth my time, but the "too good to be true" gene lit up, so I emailed the scheduler asking specifically if that shop pay was in addition to reimbursement. She replied that it was "$10 shop pay and up to $15 reimbursement" and asked if I was interested. I replied no thanks, but hoped that perhaps she would get the hint and revert to more "honest" advertising.

You guessed it, "shop pay" now seems to include reimbursement in all her ads, where just last week it was separate from reimbursement.

- Am I out of line/naive/not-yet-jaded-enough to think that is crossing a line?
- Should I bother to communicate my concern more directly with her?
- As an independent scheduler, is she responsible to anyone that might care?

(I recognize there are some other MSC shops (e.g. dealership auto servicing) that routinely include reimbursement as part of a high advertised "shop pay," but this one represented a change--one that I started to fall for.)

Thanks in advance for your contributions to my "continuing education..."

IMO, that was questionable practice but not outright lying. She'll earn a bad reputation if she keeps playing that kind of games.

- Am I out of line/naive/not-yet-jaded-enough to think that is crossing a line? No.
- Should I bother to communicate my concern more directly with her? No.
- As an independent scheduler, is she responsible to anyone that might care? It depends on the MSC. Many MSCs don't care if a scheduler's games get her the desired result, i.e. filling the shops.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2013 05:34AM by BusyBeeBuzzBuzzBuzz.

I'd call that dirty pool. And I appreciate the head's up although I'm also in the geezer category and have no interest in eating flapping chicken parts anyway.

If they are presenting this as "$25 shop pay, then you ought to have the right to order whatever amount of chicken parts you want, and get $25 upon submission of a complete and accurate report. Otherwise, this is a lie, because it would likely be impossible to order exactly $15 worth of chicken parts which means if they cap the total pay at $25, you have received less than $10 shop pay, and if you order $12 worth of chicken parts and they pay you only $22, then this is NOT a $25 shop.

So . . . it's dirty pool at best, and a lie at worst, and something to probably be avoided at all costs in either case.


On the other hand, I someday hope to be able to take one of the $50 bowling shops -- it's a flat fee of $50 as long as you spend a total of at least $38 in bowling, shoes, food, etc. that you are required to purchase. Leaving a $12 shop fee ONLY if you can hit that $38 right on the nose. Similar situation, but they have always been presented like that (always being ever since I first noticed them, about 2 1/2 months ago).

I wish they'd just call a spade a spade.

Actually, I get this alot. I always open and read the details.

If she said, "This shop pays $10 bucks." it would not be entirely the truth. This shop pays $10 bucks plus $15 bucks reimbursement. So, for all purposes, it is indeed a $25 shop.

But the word she needs to drop is "shop pay-$25" to "$25 chicken shop." At that point, the reader opens the $25 chicken shop guidelines and realizes that includes the reimbursement and the shop fee.

Would they like it if WE played that game with our reports? I THINK NOT.....

I've also recently noticed "false advertising" with a few schedulers. An $18.50 pet store is actually $8.50 + A $10.00 reimbursement for the REQUIRED purchase.

SunnyDays2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, I get this alot. I always open and read
> the details.
>
> If she said, "This shop pays $10 bucks." it would
> not be entirely the truth. This shop pays $10
> bucks plus $15 bucks reimbursement. So, for all
> purposes, it is indeed a $25 shop.
>
> But the word she needs to drop is "shop pay-$25"
> to "$25 chicken shop." At that point, the reader
> opens the $25 chicken shop guidelines and realizes
> that includes the reimbursement and the shop
> fee.


I respectfully disagree.

The shop pays $10, because that is the amount you are going to report as taxable income [in theory]. The $15 reimbursement is not income because it is repaying you money you spent to do the job, and money that [again in theory] has already been reported once as income for tax purposes.

And that's the other reason why the shops should openly state pay & reimbursement--it makes our recordkeeping easier.

Once I took a "$35" shop only to find $5 was to pay for the postage to mail required materials back to the MSC. That $5 did not benefit me in any way and I expressed this to the scheduler. Future postings for the job stated a shop fee of $30.

More recently there have been postings for a $51 job. The shop fee is only $23 with the other $28 going toward purchasing some type of membership.

What I can actually bank is pay, plain and simple. Don't tell me the assignment pays $25 when in reality only $10 will come to my wallet.

The reiumbursement may or may not have some value to me, but any monies shuffled around between me and the MSC in this respect is just a paper chase, not earnings.

I have learned to read those e-mails very carefully and check the actual shop, prior to accepting. I am seeng a lot of this lately.

I'm also seeing more where the numbers just don't add up. There have also been a lot trumpeting "bonus" in the subject line with no amount and just listing the normal fees in the body of the e-mail.

Well she technically is paying you $25 when it comes down to it but I can definitely see your concern. In my opinion, never take it personally or let it get to you. You may not like a scheduler or the way they handle things but that should not hold you back from conducting mystery shops. Always look past the advertising and scheduling tricks and take the shop at face value. I think you did right by thoroughly reading into the terms and just declining the shop - while it may be fulfilling to call her out on it, it’s really of no benefit to you. If you are a serious mystery shopper and conduct numerous shops or treat it as full time work then you want to use your time wisely and focus on keeping good connections - schedulers are a means to an end. Like I've said before, the smartest way to handle a scheduler is to treat them as if they were your boss. It’s not a superiority thing, but rather just realizing that this individual is responsible for your payment.

And believe me, another shopper will surely call her out on it - most likely a more inexperienced shopper who won't stick around for long. Let them deal with that. While they're writing emails back and forth with the scheduler or calling in to complain, you've already moved onto the next shop. It generally takes far less time and energy to just read through a shop ad and find the facts than argue with a scheduler over business ethics. I'm not saying that schedulers deserve to get away with it or have the right to pull things like that, I'm just saying that it may not be worth your time to deal with it. One thing you learn pretty quickly in this business is that time is money. Invest it wisely.

As for her being an independent scheduler, if you know the MSC and schedulers who work directly for the MSC then I would imagine that they would appreciate it if you told them what you thought. As someone working for an MSC that does use independent schedulers, I would like to know what my shoppers think about them and how they are doing. It may be of no direct benefit to you, but I know I would appreciate it and hold that shopper in higher regards. It's a good way to build trust and develop a good connection.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2013 02:42PM by DLerner.

First, I am my own boss. Scheduler's are my company contacts and I have great working relationships with many of them, that still does not make them my boss. I accord them respect as a business contact.

Second, you said time is money. After having to take extra time to read the fine print in e-mails from schedulers who are misleading, guess where their e-mails go in the future?

Dylan states:

the smartest way to handle a scheduler is to treat them as if they were your boss.

BOB'S reply:

I'm a self-employed contractor; I've been my boss for almost 1/2 century. Therefore, I disagree with Dylan and cast my lot with Lisa.

Dylan comments:

As someone working for an MSC that does use independent schedulers, I would like to know what my shoppers think about them and how they are doing.

BOB'S reply:

In 10 yrs., I can only recall 3 problems with a scheduler, but none were MSC employees. As the bulk of my assignments are with large well-capitalized companies, who tend to use their staff, perhaps I'm not qualified to accurately respond to Dylan's request. I will, though, use as an example one of his schedulers, Jake Z. The man is ALWAYS there when needed, but never meddles; that's all I ask from an associate.

BOB'S comment:

Dylan stated several logical business points; we simply disagree on the consideration of a scheduler.

I agree with most of Dylan's post, and appreciate the spirit behind the post. I don't see the post as saying shoppers should consider schedulers to be our bosses. Instead, it's saying we should treat schedulers like we treat our bosses.

I actually disagree with that. I think we should consider schedulers as representatives of our clients/customers. We are independent contractors/small business owners. We choose whether we will work for a client, and the client chooses whether or not to use us. It's a two-way street.

What he is trying to tell you is if you burn your bridges with that scheduler, you don't know where they will end up in the future and it could prevent you from getting other jobs in the future, regardless of whether you like the way they conduct business or handle communications.

Much in the way a regular boss does...

In areas where there are fewer shoppers than there are jobs, the shopper wields the power. In areas where there are more shoppers than jobs, the scheduler wields the power. We must not ever lose sight of this, and also need to realize that the ratio of shoppers to jobs can flip-flop very quickly.

And that's just reality.

Thank you for considering both sides - I really do appreciate it. I can see where some of the mix-up happened – I am in no way stating that a scheduler is a boss to a shopper. The IC agreements make that clear and I am familiar with the typical content of such agreements. I am also not suggesting that you should ultimately be submissive to a scheduler. I was suggesting treating contact with the scheduler like that of a boss and employee, especially in the sense that a boss generally would have the authority/power to make most if not all of the decisions. When I said "act like they are your bosses," I probably should have been more clear in what I meant by 'act.' By 'act,' I meant use appropriate business etiquette and to keep in mind that there is competition in mystery shopping, just like an employee would generally do in the relationship with their boss. We cannot ignore the fact that a scheduler can generally find another shopper much more easily than a shopper has in finding other shops, other MSC's, or simply finding the money elsewhere – excluding any outlying factors or circumstances.

In my experience, many shoppers, especially for their first few months, are not all that familiar with what an Independent Contractor is and how they work into the scheduler to shopper dynamic. We are in this business together and I can see why terms such as 'business contact' and 'partners' come to mind. While they are applicable, they simply would not have worked in the context of what I was trying to advise. In many ways the relationship between shopper and scheduler can be described as business contacts, but there are ways in which that description might not work. For example, there are 10,000 mystery shoppers for every one scheduler. The ratio exemplifies a power shift. While we still are business contacts in this context, it would be misguiding to imply any sort of equality there given the outstanding ratio. In discussing this example, I would always strongly advise a shopper to keep that power shift in mind, especially if they are serious about mystery shopping. It can be related to the boss to employee relationship where a boss also has his/her own authority over certain aspects of the job, including assessing the employee and managing their work/compensation. I know it’s not very appealing, but neither is the situation. As I said, it’s the ‘smartest’ way to perhaps get more jobs, not the nicest or most fun.

I am not sure how detailed the emails are that you receive, but from my experience in mystery shopping, it generally takes a minute or two to read into the fine print. I can understand that it would get annoying reading those emails and that you may not want to work with the scheduler or the MSC anymore because of that, but it really only affects you and not the MSC. They might be loose and mediocre job opportunities, but they are still job opportunities. However, I know there are instances where the scheduler may have excluded information from the email and those I can easily understanding casting aside. I was referring to the typical shop email, which would include all pertinent information.

I guess it all depends on your own strategy and work ethic. I was simply telling the OP how I view things when I conduct mystery shops myself.

Shortly after joining Volition several yrs. ago, I became aware some shoppers actually feared schedulers and their possible ability to affect their livelihood. As I attempt to understand how another's shoe would fit on the my foot, I realize each of us is in situations with our lives that may well dictate our actions. That level of concern, some feel, isn't me, but, as has been stated on numerous occasions, "To each his/her own."

Both Techman and secret advanced very sound and logical business thoughts many shoppers, wishing success in this industry, would do well to heed. As for me, it's my wish to be judged by my ability and record. Any scheduler wishing to dismiss me from consideration for work, has merely to "pass me over." In this business, I've been both the terminated and the terminator; not surprisingly, life hasn't missed a beat.

I see the point you are trying to make, but didn't like the boss/employee paradigm because we try to educate newer shoppers and reinforce the idea of them being ICs. I prefer to think in terms of sales, the MSC being the client to which I am selling my skills. If they choose to purchase my skills, we then work together to accomplish our goals.

As far as the time involved in reading the fine print, you have to remember that many of us are registered with 150 MSCs or more. It is not an exaggeration to say that I get a minimum of several dozen e-mails per day. A minute or two can easily turn into an hour or more each day.

In all honesty, I don't find most e-mails from actual MSCs to fall into this category. It seems most are from scheduling companies.

LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see the point you are trying to make, but didn't
> like the boss/employee paradigm because we try to
> educate newer shoppers and reinforce the idea of
> them being ICs. I prefer to think in terms of
> sales, the MSC being the client to which I am
> selling my skills. If they choose to purchase my
> skills, we then work together to accomplish our
> goals.
>
> As far as the time involved in reading the fine
> print, you have to remember that many of us are
> registered with 150 MSCs or more. It is not an
> exaggeration to say that I get a minimum of
> several dozen e-mails per day. A minute or two can
> easily turn into an hour or more each day.


You read the fine print? I read the subject line and keep on going if either A) I don't like what it says or I know its from a scheduler who has a habit of misleading on their emails.

Their loss not mine. I have no shortage of work.

Actually Dylan said it would only take a couple of minutes to read the fine print and I was just pointing out how quickly the time can add up. Once it is established a scheduler has a habit of sending misleading e-mails, they are deleted without even being opened.

Thanks for the discussion. I second the idea that schedulers deserve respect and professional courtesy while at the same time, we do not owe them any submission. There might even be a hint of the Golden Rule in here somewhere....

I will probably be occasionally annoyed at the emails, but I will get over it over time as I delete them. Sad thing is, if she ever actually bonuses a shop like she is advertising, it'll go to someone else! (Sigh). :-)