If I had to wager, Trendsource will eventually cave on this and pay the fee, DEPENDING if they need people in certain areas. Meaning ... they will have it done without charging you ... or they will reimburse you.
If you live in California, where a majority of the BV's are performed, as they posted at least 10 a day in my area alone ... you can probably forget about them reimbursing you for this. They have more than an ample supply of shoppers out that way, whom you have to fight for BV's.
The thing is ... I completely agree with the need for having background checks done. If I was someone and I had a stranger coming into my house and asking questions about my line of work and taking pictures, I damn sure want to know that this is a trustworthy individual. Frankly, I applaud Trendsource for taking this step.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 11:33PM by mystikwizard.
It is differences of opinions that make horse races. If I need a background check to visit these places, THEY need a background check as well to ascertain my safety. Meanwhile, I am neither willing to pay to play nor to have them waive the fee (or pay it themselves). They have no RIGHT to a background check.
I can completely understand one's need for safety. When I did these, I visited at least one or two shady people out of about 100 Business Verifications I did. But, many of the people I visited worked from their own home, and these people have a lot of money. You have no identification as a Trendsource affiliate (hence which prompted me to purchase business cards made with my name and the Trendsource name on them ... as I was tired of being questioned on it). And the people don't know you from any stranger you would see on the street. I completely understand where they are coming from and I have no difficulty putting myself in their shoes.
If one does not want to have a Background Check done to make the customers of the client more at ease with a complete stranger coming into their home, then Trendsource will have no difficulty finding someone who will.
I definitely take the side of Trendsource on this one.
> I can completely understand one's need for safety.
> When I did these, I visited at least one or two
> shady people out of about 100 Business
> Verifications I did. But, many of the people I
> visited worked from their own home, and these
> people have a lot of money. You have no
> identification as a Trendsource affiliate (hence
> which prompted me to purchase business cards made
> with my name and the Trendsource name on them ...
> as I was tired of being questioned on it). And
> the people don't know you from any stranger you
> would see on the street. I completely understand
> where they are coming from and I have no
> difficulty putting myself in their shoes.
> If one does not want to have a Background Check
> done to make the customers of the client more at
> ease with a complete stranger coming into their
> home, then Trendsource will have no difficulty
> finding someone who will.
> I definitely take the side of Trendsource on this
Guess it depends on where ya live. I have never done a BV anywhere but an office complex, retail strip center or freestanding office building. Ever.
Working from home isn't all that common here, though.
If you ever looked at the paperwork you gave to the customer you will have noted that there was encouragement for them to call a toll free number to tell them about the professionalism of the evaluator. The customer also received a copy of that document prior to your first phone call. I'm sure that if an evaluator made a customer uncomfortable they would very likely have reported it and I suspect that evaluator would have been taken off the project.
This is a major reason that I feel the background check is overkill. I have had background checks for work that paid well and involved working with children or with other people's money. Those were sensible IMHO. This is not. Those cost $50-$100 depending on how much checking was done. My guess is that an under $10 check is completely worthless. Perhaps they even pay shoppers a couple of bucks to run down to the courthouse and see if they can find an arrest record. Plus, once you are 'certified' as not being a societal danger you are still paid exactly the same as you were last year when you could have been a rapist, thief or murderer.
Nope. This is too little to be realistic and not paying a penny more to the shopper. It is dead in the water as far as I am concerned.
Anyone going to a home should have a background check and not doing one can put the company in jeopardy.
I realize Flash will disagree, but facts are facts.
If I sent a shopper to a home to do a BV and the shopper made a sexual advance the company sending them could be sued if proper procedures were not made to reasonably protect the home owner. Whoe's to say he/she wasn't on the National Sex Offender List unless the proper background was conducted? Doing a background check does is not a guarantee but it shows due diligence.
An example I use to clients who hire us to perform background checks is the case of a pizza delivery driver who delivered a pizza at a home. A few weeks later that home was broken into and things were taken only to find out the person arrested was the pizza delivery driver. The owner of the restaurant did not do a background on the driver and if he had he would have known the driver had several recent theft convictions. The restaurant owner was sued and the homeowner awarded, I believe, $600,000.
I know if I had someone coming to my home to do any time of verification I would hoep they had a background check.
In which case is it not unreasonable that shoppers be protected by background checks on the people whose homes we are to visit? If such a customer made sexual advances, would I sue the company that sent me or their client? Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. A pizza driver is, I believe, an employee. You companies continue to find it to your benefit to have us as ICs. If you do not see a world of difference there . . .
Shoppers have a choice whether or not to go to a home, homeowners do not have a choice on who comes (unless they ask the company to show proof that a background was run)
The fact is that backgrounds are a necesasary part in hiring employees. Many companies that use independant contractors also conduct backgrounds as well.
The solution is very simple..if you don't want a background performed on you then simply don't work for the company requesting it.
The solution is not simple. You have forgotten a couple of key elements here.
Many of us have performed BV's for some time now. No background check required.
To require one now plus, have us pay for it is wrong.
GFK for example, made this a requirement prior to starting a project. And they had the decency to pay for it! If TS offered to pay, the response would have been different.
As to the National Sex Offender Register, TS can check that as can anyone...
Shopping Bama and parts of Georgia.
I'm still learning 24/7.
And it would appear to me that a background check is an attempt to shift any potential liability for giving access to credit information from the Credit Reporting company to Trendsource and I guess that shoppers get to pay to have some share of that potential liability roll downhill on them. By agreeing to and paying for a background check in order to work, the shopper is making some statement of their suitability as an evaluator, however minimalist that may be. So suddenly you are not an "Independent Third Party" as required by law because of your potential liability. It just is all too goofy, especially in a time when identity theft is a real issue, just about daily we hear of data systems hacked and lawyers love to build class action suits of the "injured". And although this stuff keeps being presented as providing safety to the customer, I haven't seen an offer to indemnify shoppers so they can remain truly "Independent Third Party" observors.
What is a BV? Has anyone had the background and drug check for the electronic store audits? I believe they pay for it unless you fail it. $140 sounds good but I think having to do the tests are going overboard. The store should be more worried about their customers and test them!