Very very upset regarding Jamba Juice
Warning: For Full Access Please Log In or Create an Account (Free)
A while back, the MSC had a bagel shop. When it was first posted, it had a glib payment not worded in the way it usually is: "$15 fix reimbursement" (edited with exact wording.) I asked the scheduler what "fix reimbursement" meant since the wording wasn't quite the same as the infamous pizza shop wording of a fee plus $12 reimbursement. No answer from the scheduler. Out of curiosity and a liking for bagels I did the shop and spent maybe $11.50. I got the full $15. I learned that "fix reimbursement" meant no fee, but I got to keep the leftover amount.@calicakes wrote:
Sorry, my post IS WITH MERIT. .
I understand Calicakes situation. This MSC is cutting fees if offered at all, eliminating bonuses (I used to get $13 to write-up the infamous pizza, now it is $5. I won't do it for $5.)
A week or so ago, I got an email with $2 bonus in the subject line but no mention of a bonus in the assignment details. This MSC may be purposefully obfuscating its payments for a reason. Fool me once ... never again.
Shopping SoCal and Maui.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2019 02:46AM by PuaM.
I do not think the change to a $5 fee for the pizza shop was at all hidden. I saw it immediately. They have many less shops to fill at each location this year so I am pretty sure they are trying out the lower fee to see if they will get all or most of them done at that rate. If not, you will start to see the bonuses eventually. Many of us bought December gift cards for that pizza shop so now we need to use them up. I am not happy with the lowered fee and will probably wait out a bonus of some sort but I also do not really want to eat all that pizza on my own dime.
As for the wording of the emails, for all the msc's I hear from the wording is from the scheduler, not from the msc. If you are confused or feel mislead the best thing to do is mention it to your scheduler. I find most of them to be very accommodating when something that does not sound right is pointed out to them.
As for the wording of the emails, for all the msc's I hear from the wording is from the scheduler, not from the msc. If you are confused or feel mislead the best thing to do is mention it to your scheduler. I find most of them to be very accommodating when something that does not sound right is pointed out to them.
I took a job with a similar wording and then realized that I was confused. However, I did get a response to my question.
My understanding is the opposite of yours, that the whole $ amount listed is the fee with $0 reimbursed. Although I suppose if they listed it that way, someone could easily think that they are getting the fee amount + a regular reimbursement. I don't think they trying to be tricky about it.
My understanding is the opposite of yours, that the whole $ amount listed is the fee with $0 reimbursed. Although I suppose if they listed it that way, someone could easily think that they are getting the fee amount + a regular reimbursement. I don't think they trying to be tricky about it.
@PuaM wrote:
A while back, the MSC had a bagel shop. When it was first posted, it had a glib payment not worded in the way it usually is: "$15 fix reimbursement" (edited with exact wording.) I asked the scheduler what "fix reimbursement" meant since the wording wasn't quite the same as the infamous pizza shop wording of a fee plus $12 reimbursement. No answer from the scheduler. Out of curiosity and a liking for bagels I did the shop and spent maybe $11.50. I got the full $15. I learned that "fix reimbursement" meant no fee, but I got to keep the leftover amount.
In the "fix reimbursement" example I got $15 for my $11.50 expenditure. Although there was no "fee" I did pocket the change of $3.50. I only mentioned this because the pay is not always clear. I understand that your understanding might not be the same as mine. However, the fact is that I did clear a few bucks since the pay was a flat amount. Had I figured out how to spend $2 (for the required three items) then I would have netted $13.@1cent wrote:
I took a job with a similar wording and then realized that I was confused. However, I did get a response to my question.
My understanding is the opposite of yours, that the whole $ amount listed is the fee with $0 reimbursed. Although I suppose if they listed it that way, someone could easily think that they are getting the fee amount + a regular reimbursement. I don't think they trying to be tricky about it.
@PuaM wrote:
A while back, the MSC had a bagel shop. When it was first posted, it had a glib payment not worded in the way it usually is: "$15 fix reimbursement" (edited with exact wording.) I asked the scheduler what "fix reimbursement" meant since the wording wasn't quite the same as the infamous pizza shop wording of a fee plus $12 reimbursement. No answer from the scheduler. Out of curiosity and a liking for bagels I did the shop and spent maybe $11.50. I got the full $15. I learned that "fix reimbursement" meant no fee, but I got to keep the leftover amount.
Shopping SoCal and Maui.
@PuaM wrote:
In the "fix reimbursement" example I got $15 for my $11.50 expenditure. Although there was no "fee" I did pocket the change of $3.50. I only mentioned this because the pay is not always clear. I understand that your understanding might not be the same as mine. However, the fact is that I did clear a few bucks since the pay was a flat amount. Had I figured out how to spend $2 (for the required three items) then I would have netted $13.@1cent wrote:
I took a job with a similar wording and then realized that I was confused. However, I did get a response to my question.
My understanding is the opposite of yours, that the whole $ amount listed is the fee with $0 reimbursed. Although I suppose if they listed it that way, someone could easily think that they are getting the fee amount + a regular reimbursement. I don't think they trying to be tricky about it.
@PuaM wrote:
A while back, the MSC had a bagel shop. When it was first posted, it had a glib payment not worded in the way it usually is: "$15 fix reimbursement" (edited with exact wording.) I asked the scheduler what "fix reimbursement" meant since the wording wasn't quite the same as the infamous pizza shop wording of a fee plus $12 reimbursement. No answer from the scheduler. Out of curiosity and a liking for bagels I did the shop and spent maybe $11.50. I got the full $15. I learned that "fix reimbursement" meant no fee, but I got to keep the leftover amount.
Right. The company isn't calling it a shop fee, but that's how I am counting it in my spreadsheet. Using your example, Fee: $15, Expense: $11.50, Reimbursement: $0.
It all comes out the same end of the day. Except as you said, it affects how you order to get the most value. The incentive is to be thrifty because the pay/reimbursement is fixed.
Yes, "fixed reimbursement" is the same as "flat fee" with this MSC. If it doesn't say fixed, it's just a regular reimbursement limit (not a flat fee), though. That has been my experience anyway.
Happily shopping the Pacific Northwest. Shopping since 2013 
@oteixeira wrote:
I think if you find your scheduler for this MSC so misleading you should de-register. I agree with the others that the body of the message, as well as the way you can read guidelines on their site make it very clear this was a reimburse only, and that you would not get "paid" the rest of the money for your work.
Why would I do that when I perform a lot of other shops for different schedulers? Apparently, this scheduler must have agreed with me, because she changed the wording of her subject line. They no longer say " 15.00 payment purchase requirement.
This subject has been beaten to death already but I just had an aha moment of a comment...I believe this job used to require an order of more than one item and then about a year ago the ordering requirement was changed. In their zeal to get across the idea that now you are not required to make the previous two or three purchases but now only one the schedulers have gone out on a limb on explaining the change. Out on that limb some of them are not thinking thoroughly about what they are writing. I personally cannot imagine being a scheduler who needs to get a certain number of jobs scheduled by a looming deadline especially in situations where there is no fee involved. I imagine their minds are racing to find a new and catchy subject line to attract more interest in a job that has been sitting on the boards. This is not an excuse for them not using proper words to convey the job...just my explanation of how these misleading subject lines get there.
Are you saying it is unintentional or the lack of ease with use of the English language to explain things properly? Or could it be, just maybe, a little intentional baiting with no full disclosure? I feel the latter is in most case: Intentionally misleading , strong selling. After all, some shoppers fell for baits like that.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/26/2019 10:54PM by ShopperFun99.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/26/2019 10:54PM by ShopperFun99.
Hey shopperfun99..i think all of the above applies in different situations but I do not like to directly accuse anyone of misconduct or misleading intention directly when i do not know the situation. Schedulers are people and different people have different standards and understanding of grammar and ethics and the fallout of what they write. I am sure there are those schedulers that intentionally misguide but there are also shoppers who accept jobs and then fudge them in the report. Hopefully those that do that will either be corrected or will not be around long.
Could be boilerplate emails. Another shop had a bonus but this one didn't. The scheduler could have inadvertently used the same email but with a different assignment attached. I do give the schedulers a break but sometimes I wonder ...@sandyf wrote:
Hey shopperfun99..i think all of the above applies in different situations but I do not like to directly accuse anyone of misconduct or misleading intention directly when i do not know the situation.
Shopping SoCal and Maui.
I am still seeing Jamba Juice shopped by the previous company (Prophet). The reimbursement is the same but the report is so much easier and no pictures are required. I even saw the exact same location being offered on the same date by both MSC’s. I chose the old company. Hard to understand why the chain is using both companies unless they are testing to see which MSC provides the better reports. I believe companies don’t understand that different MSC’s probably use the same shoppers.
Here is another misleading subject line from the same msc
Earn up to $16 in bonus money for these GREAT lunch shops in SoCa
Oh yeah I do like the shop in question but the small print says I have to do at least 2 of them for a bonus of $2 each so to earn a bonus of $16 I need to drive all over so cal and do 8 lunch shops. It can be argued that they did say earn UP TO $16, but still!!!
Earn up to $16 in bonus money for these GREAT lunch shops in SoCa
Oh yeah I do like the shop in question but the small print says I have to do at least 2 of them for a bonus of $2 each so to earn a bonus of $16 I need to drive all over so cal and do 8 lunch shops. It can be argued that they did say earn UP TO $16, but still!!!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.