I'll admit right now that I'm seriously annoyed so that is coloring my mood at the moment, but I do have a legitimate question:

When a shop gets rejected due to some kind of infraction but the report content is still good, does any of that information get sent to the customer?

For example, I just received word that the 5 perfectly fine standalone fueling stations I audited on Sunday (14 to 20 photos apiece) were invalidated because I wasn't supposed to shop them on a Sunday. Admittedly, the very first sentence in the guidelines said they shouldn't be shopped on a Sunday, but I didn't realize this until afterward. In my defense, they were assigned to me by the scheduler to be completed on a Sunday.

Besides the sting from the lost cash, I'm left wondering if the reports are transmitted to the client anyway? Do they benefit from my hard work that I won't get paid for? These fueling stations were in remote areas and it's highly unlikely they will get reshopped before the deadline, so I think it's reasonable to wonder if the data I provided will be used in spite of not being paid.

I guess I'm hoping to hear back that this doesn't happen, but I don't know for sure.

I would have to think this is some sort of violation of the ICA you have with them. For them to use your work product they have to pay you consideration (fee). I don't think they can take the rights to your work product without consideration which is a legal component of a valid contract. I'm not a lawyer though, so it would probably require an attorney looking at the contract language.

@giannarama wrote:

When a shop gets rejected due to some kind of infraction but the report content is still good, does any of that information get sent to the customer?

For example, I just received word that the 5 perfectly fine standalone fueling stations I audited on Sunday (14 to 20 photos apiece) were invalidated because I wasn't supposed to shop them on a Sunday. Admittedly, the very first sentence in the guidelines said they shouldn't be shopped on a Sunday, but I didn't realize this until afterward. In my defense, they were assigned to me by the scheduler to be completed on a Sunday.

Besides the sting from the lost cash, I'm left wondering if the reports are transmitted to the client anyway? Do they benefit from my hard work that I won't get paid for? These fueling stations were in remote areas and it's highly unlikely they will get reshopped before the deadline, so I think it's reasonable to wonder if the data I provided will be used in spite of not being paid.

I guess I'm hoping to hear back that this doesn't happen, but I don't know for sure.

No, as an ex-editor, I can tell you that if a report is rejected, the report is not used and the information is not transmitted to the client. The shop is reassigned to another shopper. The rejected report, no matter how good it was other than the mistake, is no good and is trash-canned. If it is too close to the deadline to be rescheduled, then no shop is submitted to the client. An MSC will not deliberately release a defective report to a client - it makes the MSC look bad.

I understand you feel stung because you goofed and now you won't be paid, but here's a little more info. In a lot of cases, when the shopper goofs, the scheduler who scheduled the shop and the editor who edited the shop, are also not paid. How is that for a sting? It always burned me up: the shopper goofs and doesn't get paid and I didn't get paid either! It was really hard to feel sympathetic to a shopper who goofed and caused me not to get paid, too!

In the case of a shop that said in the guidelines that it should not be done on Sunday, that would have come straight from the client. Any shop done on Sunday would not be acceptable to the client and no way would the MSC submit it. Your editor probably dejectedly and disgustedly threw your report in the trash. Since it was not what the client ordered, it was no good.

Jay C, thank you for the response and the perspective of an editor. It's super helpful to hear from the other side of the fence!

Makes it feel like less of a "me against them" kind of relationship.

We have been told repeatedly that if we don't follow the Guidelines we don't get paid. END of STORY!

Shopper8, I'm not arguing whether or not the guidelines weren't followed. I'm accepting that a mistake was made.

I just want to know what happens to the report/data when it gets rejected.

@giannarama wrote:

I'll admit right now that I'm seriously annoyed so that is coloring my mood at the moment, but I do have a legitimate question:

When a shop gets rejected due to some kind of infraction but the report content is still good, does any of that information get sent to the customer?

For example, I just received word that the 5 perfectly fine standalone fueling stations I audited on Sunday (14 to 20 photos apiece) were invalidated because I wasn't supposed to shop them on a Sunday. Admittedly, the very first sentence in the guidelines said they shouldn't be shopped on a Sunday, but I didn't realize this until afterward. In my defense, they were assigned to me by the scheduler to be completed on a Sunday. [End of quote]

Do you have any written proof, such as an email or screen shot, that the scheduler assigned it to be completed on a Sunday? Sometimes a scheduler can override the shop date requirements, particularly toward the end of the month when they need to get the shop done. Perhaps this is the case here and the scheduler didn’t inform the editor. If you have proof of this I would challenge the rejection.

While it's possible these shops could have been assigned and approved for Sunday, and that information didn't get parlayed to editorial, most of the time when guidelines are not followed, the end client never hears about it.

If you were an MSC, would you want to go to your client and say, "Our contractor messed this up, but do you want it anyway?"

Most of the time, the shop gets reassigned to another evaluator who performs it within the specifications and that's the only shop the client sees.....

@SteveSoCal wrote:

While it's possible these shops could have been assigned and approved for Sunday, and that information didn't get parlayed to editorial, most of the time when guidelines are not followed, the end client never hears about it.

If you were an MSC, would you want to go to your client and say, "Our contractor messed this up, but do you want it anyway?"

Most of the time, the shop gets reassigned to another evaluator who performs it within the specifications and that's the only shop the client sees.....

But if the scheduler made the error and assigned it for a Sunday, shouldn’t the MSC take responsibility and pay the shopper even if the client doesn’t accept the shop. Also I have done shops where the scheduler deviated from the shop requirements (rotation, number in party for restaurants, days of the week, time periods, etc) and I was paid. The key is having the deviation in writing.

@kenasch wrote:

But if the scheduler made the error and assigned it for a Sunday, shouldn’t the MSC take responsibility and pay the shopper even if the client doesn’t accept the shop.

Yes, I can see an argument for that. Depends on the company, and if the exception was in writing.

If the scheduler assigned you that day (in writing), you did the assignment as instructed. So many times I see, "Special instructions and comments may override the general guidelines," or similar. imho, you should contact the scheduler/MSC.

I recently did a shop where I was not able to do the second part of my assignment, which was a basic requirement of the assignment, due to the employees' actions. I called the scheduler right away, they agreed and told me to write it up just as it happened, that this was something the client needed to know. An editor bounced it back to me for completion of the third portion of the assignment (they obviously hadn't read my narrative). I called the MSC, they told me to forward the email so they could take care of it, and that I would be paid for the report. So it's the old "left hand/right hand" thing sometimes, and a call to the scheduler/MSC is helpful at least some of the time.

As an editor with inside information, I can say that it looks like such reports *occasionally* are sent to the client.

As a shopper with nothing but suspicion to back me up, I have a feeling that a high fee report I that I was not paid for (different MSC) was sent to the client.