One practice that needs to end is schedulers advertising reimbursement as compensation, which is a practice that is prevalent for restaurant shops. I can't count how many times that I have viewed in emails or on job boards what appears to be a well-compensated shop, only to find that the advertised fee is not that at all, but instead a reimbursement for the necessary requirements to complete the shop. GFK and their wings shops are among the worst offenders in this regard.

This is precisely why I do not do restaurant shops. I simply do not want to be paid in food.

Please help me understand why you feel this way; what's deceitful?

Being reimbursed for food is not compensation?
Are you using the word compensation to simply mean receiving "cash", rather than any other form of payment?
If you receive $20 worth of food for 1 hour of work, is this not compensation?
In the same vein, do you feel the same way about hotel shops and receiving a free night?
Is it the WORD being used this way you don't like? Or is it that you want cash and food?

What is deceitful in this?

I just don't understand.

I do not like being paid in restaurant food. It does not help me pay the bills. So I want to know as soon as I look at a job what it PAYS after the reimbursement, not have the reimbursement lumped in with the payment. It does feel deceitful.
If it's a sit down restaurant DH and I usually are out of pocket time we pay the tip. So what we've saved on groceries went to the restaurant anyway. Around here the Fast Food places get bonused, that money helps me pay the bills. I might consider the food useful about 25% of the time. Even then, most of the fries, pop and bun go in the garbage. I do too many of these shops for us to eat all that food. So, the reimbursement is not payment to me.
I've done hotel shops when they included a fee ($15.00) because they were near my family's home. Now they seem to have gone to a different MSC and are reimbursement only. It was a pleasant way to earn $15.00, then move to my family's place for the rest of my stay but now I'm going to stay at my family's place for that night as well.

A reimbursement has to be something I would buy anyway, or it is NOT payment to me. Hair cuts, groceries, gas, and oil changes fall under this category.

Having said all this, if I could find a reimbursement hotel or restaurant in Canmore or Banff the end of this month, I would be jumping on that. lol

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2013 05:25PM by prince.

I signed up with an MSC because they advertised on the MSPA site $60 pay for oil change. I signed up, and it was $40 reimbursement + $35 shop fee. Then I got a phone call from the MSC wanting to sign me up. I said I have a big F150 and the oil change itself might be $60. The lady then checked and said it might be only $55 max for my truck, so the lady said she will add an extra $15 if I take it. So I signed up thinking it will be $90. When I checked my email it was $40 reimbursement + $20 fee +15 bonus. :-/

I took the shop and you can read about it under "my bad day yesterday".

Well, I would consider that $75.00 towards my oil change, but it's not $90!! But our truck is a diesal, one MSC says no diesals for their oil changes.
The MSC that does Ford will only give me reimbursement $60 + $30 Fee. So I have to check if that will cover an oil change at the dealership or if DH can do it cheaper himself. Sometimes mystery shopping is too much math for me. LOL

For most cases deceitful may be too strong a word. Instead I find it to be frustrating and time-wasting.

Remember when a client and MSC offer reimbursement, they are actually putting that value on the shop even if we do not. So no, a FF shop that pays $5 and offers a $10 reimbursement is not a $15 shop to me.

In all these years I have only found one that could be considered deceitful. The reimbursement to mail materials back to the MSC was included in the fee. Obviously, that was not a usable reimbursement to the shopper. I lodged a complaint with the scheduler and future postings for the job clearly defined the actual fee.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2013 06:40PM by LisaSTL.

I'm a little confused about GFK and the wing shops. Here it says $5.00 plus up to $15.00 reimbursement. I do these shops regularly, and always get what they state.

Reimbursement is like tax free pay to me. Doesn't become deceit until they report a reimbursable amount that can't possibly be reached due to ordering requirements.

RobG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm a little confused about GFK and the wing
> shops. Here it says $5.00 plus up to $15.00
> reimbursement. I do these shops regularly, and
> always get what they state.


Because I must have about 200 of these emails on my computer right now I checked and went through about ten of them and I agree the GFK wing shop clearly states 5.00 pay/15.00 reimbursement. That is both the sassie generated one and then the more I know you are in the neighborhood personal ones sent by schedulers.

I would honestly prefer to get 20.00 flat reimbursement on that. Then I am not taxed at all. My husband and I did lunch there for right at 20.00.

Liz

RobG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm a little confused about GFK and the wing
> shops. Here it says $5.00 plus up to $15.00
> reimbursement. I do these shops regularly, and
> always get what they state.

They might pay me what they state. And if they state up front that the fee is $5.00 then I`m happy with how they`re posting the job. I can decide if I want to earn $5.00 or not. My beef is with lead ins that call a shop $20.00 when it`s actually $5.00 plus a $15.00 reimbursement. (for example)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2013 07:21PM by prince.

Well, taxes are a point to consider Liz. If I actually need a meal because I`m away from home, I would appreciate the tax free option. I rarely can find those shops where and when they would benefit me.

I must be lucky then. I've never seen a shop that only shows reimbursement without the actual money amount for the shop itself. Like today, I did a restaurant shop. Got $10 fee and up to $35 reimbursement (to pay for the food) I think of it as $10 in my pocket and a free lunch. Something like that.

Getting reimbursed the amount spent on food plus small compensation is in no way deceitful. I've done several restaurant shops in the past where I knew that I was going to take my spouse out to. If I am getting reimbursed for a meal that I would have purchased anyway at an expense, what's not to love about that? The same thing can be said about reimbursement for other goods and services, such as clothes, etc.

If you don't like getting reimbursed for an expense that you would have spent anyway, the simple solution is this: just don't do shops that offer reimbursement as part of the shop payment conditions.

I agree. I don't have to do any shop that I don't feel like doing. And I don't.

Some e-mails and job boards post the reimbursement and fee clearly so it can be seen at a glance. Some e-mails and job boards lump them together and you have to read further to find out that information.

I have a preference for having it clearly stated at first glance how much the fee is and how much the reimbursement is. Then I can make my decisions quicker.

It's not a big deal, but it's just my wishful thinking for how things should be done.

Just a way to make it sound better than what it is........!

miketfse Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please help me understand why you feel this way;
> what's deceitful?
>
> Being reimbursed for food is not compensation?
> Are you using the word compensation to simply mean
> receiving "cash", rather than any other form of
> payment?
> If you receive $20 worth of food for 1 hour of
> work, is this not compensation?
> In the same vein, do you feel the same way about
> hotel shops and receiving a free night?
> Is it the WORD being used this way you don't like?
> Or is it that you want cash and food?
>
> What is deceitful in this?
>
> I just don't understand.


Reimbursement is not compensation. When someone gets reimbursed for something a person is getting back the exact amount of money that that person spent out of pocket for paying for something. Compensation is any amount of money given to someone in exchange for performing a service. You are compensated for your time and efforts. You are reimbursed for any money you outlay.

That's not the definition of compensation, though.

You sent me to the dictionary.

I don't think deceitful is too strong a word for some of the stuff I have seen.

One well known MSC has bowling shops that they put the fee in the header.

They forget to mention that out of this fee you have to pay out a number of things which use up most of the payment fee.

Why not just be up front.

The fact they are trying to obfuscate is enough to question their motives.

Are they trying to trick shoppers into taking jobs?

If a company is up front and states what is a fee and what is a reinbursement then I don't have any problem with it.

Amusement park pay for parking four times out of your pay...

I think "deceitful" comes in when you get an email blaring HIGH PAYING $50 SHOP, so you look at it and it's $45 reimbursement and $5 shopper payment. Which is not high paying, and IMO not a $50 shop. I consider a $50 shop to be one that puts $50 in my pocket, not a shop that drains $45 out of my pocket for the next six weeks until I get reimbursed.

Worse, is an email headline stating "$5 bonus! $25 Shopper Pay!" and you look inside to find that that is a $5 bonus on zero pay, $25 reimbursement.

Don't get me wrong--I love reimbursement shops, and I do more of them than many posters on here. I would have no problem taking a $5 fee/$45 reimbursement shop, but let's be honest about what it is. I expect job postings to be up-front about shopper pay vs reimbursement, and I lose respect for schedulers/MSCs who use this misleading wording.

Traveliz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I would honestly prefer to get 20.00 flat
> reimbursement on that. Then I am not taxed at
> all. My husband and I did lunch there for right
> at 20.00.
>
> Liz

You won't be taxed on that $5 anyway by the time you deduct your mileage, paper, toner, and any other expenses you incurred.

dwater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
......> If a company is up front and states what is a fee
> and what is a reimbursement then I don't have any
> problem with it.

I agree.

Good Morning,
I do not care to complain, but I do feel the need to chime in. Reimbursement only shops usually require more than an hour and pidgeon hole the shopper into a purchase they may or may not need. For example, a restaurant that requires a specific entree type to purchase, also requires a specific time spent in the establishment, and requires well thought out narrative. The total reimbursement does not usually cover the full purchase, especially when the MSC indicates a minimum tip amount. I understand that a very small tip will draw attention, and I generally tip more than is required, but a tip is based on service. This little diatribe is not to complain, because I do these shops periodically, even without a seperate payment, but it is an explanation as to why the word "payment" should not be confused with "reimbursement". A reimbursement requires an outlay of money that I hope to get returned a couple of months later.Also a reimbursement covers what is spent only, so if it is advertised as a $100.00 pay, and you spend only $75.00, you are returned you'r $75.00 and not the $100.00 in most cases. This is always a risk, because the shopper may miss something that causes the report to be rejected. (Again-I am playing devil's advocate, not saying that I have been stiffed) At the very least, the word pay can be misleading, but it is not a reason to avoid these shops. I do agree that compensation may be a correct term for identifying a shop, but when it is touted as "pay", it causes shoppers to read further, and waste time researching a "paycheck" that does not exist. Personally, I will continue to apply for, and complete the ones that catch my eye

The "free" lunch/dinner is only a time to eat out (when you otherwise might not), enjoy new places and get reimbursed
for your meal...how this is deceitful seems out of line for a nice meal and sometimes a small report fee. Remember,
"perks" are every much a part of Msing as being paid in cash. Many of us enjoy a great meal for a report. They also
have you pay for the first dinner, and get gift cards in return, in my eye, this is not deceitful as they tell you up front,
and you can do it or decline.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

itsasecret Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Traveliz Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I would honestly prefer to get 20.00 flat
> > reimbursement on that. Then I am not taxed at
> > all. My husband and I did lunch there for
> right
> > at 20.00.
> >
> > Liz
>
> You won't be taxed on that $5 anyway by the time
> you deduct your mileage, paper, toner, and any
> other expenses you incurred.


True but I am even further ahead with the extra as reimbursement (since its such a small fee) and I will still get to deduct the above items.

Liz

Always check the menu on line for restaurant shops before going. it might be that you can not get what you want for the amount they give you to spend. Restaurant shops do not pay much for doing the shop----because we----accept the $5.00 or so in addition to the meal.

This practice seems to be the case with higher end restaurant shops, not so much for casual dining shops. I don't consider it deceitful, but I just won't do it. This makes me no better than the guy at the freeway exit with a, "Will Work For Food," sign.

I'm a professional. I perform a service, and that is what I want to be paid for.

IMHO, the more of us that refuse to do this kind of shop, the more MS companies will realize that collateral (what you get to take home) is incidental, and what they are paying for is the ***service*** we provide, not the service we may receive (like an oil change) or the goods we leave with and may or may not get to keep (like purchase and return shops).



amshopper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One practice that needs to end is schedulers
> advertising reimbursement as compensation, which
> is a practice that is prevalent for restaurant
> shops. I can't count how many times that I have
> viewed in emails or on job boards what appears to
> be a well-compensated shop, only to find that the
> advertised fee is not that at all, but instead a
> reimbursement for the necessary requirements to
> complete the shop. GFK and their wings shops are
> among the worst offenders in this regard.

I am not sure what food assignments are being done here with so much confusion but I love restaurant shops!! Bonus pay and/or reimbursement.
A $100 meal for my husband, friend, or co-worker paid for. My commitment - a meal with good conversation and food and about 45 minutes reporting time. What's not to love about that? Even if I go over a few dollars with tax and tip, it's still worth treating a friend or my special guy.