@salisburync wrote:

I hear you, Thunderdeacon. The 12, then 3, now 1 gas station shops (at a huge bonus because they were remote) that I was all but promised, have evaporated into the wind. I keep on hearing that schedulers are different, that each has their own ethical compass...but I think they all go to the same IPSOS sponsored "Screw 'Em" academy. They all seem to think nothing of leaving us out to dry. Simply assuming that we can change our plans and drive hundreds (if not more) of miles to cover their a$$es, is, in the long run, a fool's play. I need at least three days to plan and execute and road trip, and IPSOS changes the target and availability every few hours....hard to negotiate with a moving and fluid target. So, lesson learned, they will get no special favors from me, and I would advicse anyone reading this post to be very wary. They will lie to you.

@shopperbob wrote:

In my 18 years as a shopper, I have only completed gas stations for two MSCs: Ritter, when I was driving by the station and Maritz, which were profitable. Ipsos, a company for whom I have logged only eight assignments, none gas, in 10 years, has listed work requiring up to 34 pics + any violations for $15 + $6 reimbursement. Are there shoppers actually agreeing to such work?

@shopperbob wrote:

In my 18 years as a shopper, I have only completed gas stations for two MSCs: Ritter, when I was driving by the station and Maritz, which were profitable. Ipsos, a company for whom I have logged only eight assignments, none gas, in 10 years, has listed work requiring up to 34 pics + any violations for $15 + $6 reimbursement. Are there shoppers actually agreeing to such work?

@BuffaloNY101 wrote:

I say we band together as the shoppers who do most of these gas shops and not do them for anything under $75 pay and really make them pay for remote locations at say $150 or more. [...]

@Rousseau wrote:

@BuffaloNY101 wrote:

I say we band together as the shoppers who do most of these gas shops and not do them for anything under $75 pay and really make them pay for remote locations at say $150 or more. [...]

Such proposals are illegal. Shoppers aren't employees. We do not have collective bargaining rights. We are contractors and like any business we cannot engage in price fixing or other restraint of trade activities.

@Archer wrote:

"Such proposals are illegal."
Care to quote some case law?
This is incorrect, friend.

@krattner wrote:

A few things from the inside perspective of a scheduler:

1. 99% of the time, we don't make more when you make less. In fact, our pay rate is set before the program even begins, and usually, the only potential bonus is for us to finish the project early. In which case, we don't want to hold out the bonus money as much as you don't.

2. In the case where you are negotiating for 12 shops but eventually only 3 were available, it's a crappy situation. However, when a route is offered, the scheduler has to send it to the account manager, and if it is a substantial one, the account manager has to send it up also. And when a project is on self-assign, we really can't control if/when another shopper picks it up. And once another shopper assigns it to themselves, for all we know they can do it in the next hour and we can't really retrieve it.

3. Whomever suggested to band together and not accept shops under $75, it sounds like a lovely concept. However, even if 100% of the shoppers on this forum agreed to do so, there are 1,000s of others shoppers who are registered and willing to take majority of locations for less.

4. Always feel free to make an offer above what is listed. The worst thing the company can say is no.