Following the "new" guidelines for route requests, I spent quite some time constructing my "bid" for about 20 remote locations, very routable. I submitted it. Oh, yeah, my bid came in at about $45 per shop.

Never got a reply.

Picked a dozen of the nearest ones off the board when they hit $60. Happy camper? You bet. Fewer miles, much less work, more money.

I don't know the other side of the story and that is my point, I have no idea what transpired before that email was sent.

I am sorry you didn't get a request - was this for a client that was IShopFirst? If not, I agree, you should have gotten a response, but it sounds like it worked out in the end.

Someone was looking out for you! Well done.

If I were to buy a house tomorrow in my town, I would pay DOUBLE what I would have paid only three years ago. I find this unreasonable. But my opinion will not change the price. This is what Ipsos refuses to acknowledge. Cost of living has skyrocketed but Ipsos wants people to work for 1/4-1/2 of the compensation we received pre-Covid (with the bonuses we had gotten). How tf can ANYONE think that is reasonable??? I mean, jeez, Ipsos, call it hard times, call it being cheap, call it "The executives need more luxury vehicles" but don't call it REASONABLE when asking us to earn your money for you while receiving next to nothing for it!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2022 12:58AM by sestrahelena.

I have not done a single IShopFirst assignment, and never will.

The nearest shop to me is 45 miles away. All others are at least 100 miles away.

Frankly, I don't recall the last time I did a shop at base pay -- but I do know it was years ago.

Yeah, I was a little miffed at not getting a response -- not even a no, sorry, can't pay that -- until I saw the jobs exceed my bid.

But I was very happy to do the ones I grabbed off the board.

I just won't waste my time again constructing and submitting a bid. May be you (and others) think that's silly, but I don't have that time to waste like that and not even receive a reply. And the bid went to a scheduler I've worked with for years, who is also professional, and with whom I have had many positive interactions.

I don't do the Presto stuff, either. I did some last year or the year before, and they couldn't figure out how to pay me. So I told them don't bother, just delete me.

@KarenSchedulesForIpsos wrote:

I am sorry you didn't get a request - was this for a client that was IShopFirst? If not, I agree, you should have gotten a response, but it sounds like it worked out in the end.

I will never look at the words: "reasonable or egregious," the same again.

I don't think it is silly at all if you don't want to submit a bid that way at all.

I 100% agree with you! And I haven't really solved any issues at all today, but I hope that I have more insight into how many of you are feeling.

Can you become the new Senior Vice President? ????

HA!!! Filling shops is hard enough, I think I will just stay in my lane!

I would not waste the time to figure out the cost, time and miles of a specific route just to submit it with a 0-1% chance of it being accepted.

Also, my anger over the pay issue is absolutely not directed at schedulers or editors. They are only cogs like us and are probably getting "paycuts" as well, in one way or another. They can do only what they are allowed to do by the MSC and weild little to no power.

Maritz always fully paid me on the rare occasion that a shop was pulled when I was already on the road or I had already performed the shop. They recognized that it was not my fault, I fulfilled my end of the shop contract and should be paid for it. That is simply being fair which is a business practice that seems to have disappeared as soon as Maritz left the MS world.

And, I do not understand how a scheduler - not Karen - makes their money while alienating shoppers with canceled shops, rudeness, crickets and agreed-upon shops that are never placed on the shoppers' log. Seems counter- productive. But they're (one scheduler, specifically) still working and doing the same things over and over.

My apologies to all of you. I normally try to keep my comments positive, encouraging, helpful or humorous ( IMO, of course). This thread, this COMPANY, has really gotten to me and makes me so mad I could spit. *wipes chin* I had really enjoyed this work and they are ripping it away from me by making it too costly to continue at these rates.

I get your frustration. Again, I sound like a broken record, but I can only comment on shops that I schedule - and if a shopper wasn't notified in time about a shop cancellation and they did the shop, they have been paid. I am seeing that isn't always the case, and if that happened to me it might be something I would reach out to carey.medina@ipsos.com with specifics.
It is also good to be positive and share good experiences, and there is a lot of that here - and great advice and tips.
But it is also a place to vent, and see if others have had these experiences as well, so it's not always going to be all rosey.

Is it also possible that Carey is under the same constraints as we are? And suffers the same frustrations? That could certainly explain her frame of mind when composing that email. That the frustration, pressure, maybe lowered pay as well, caused her to "lash out" in an uncharacteristic way? We've all had times when, afterwards, we think, "Yeah, I really shouldn't have said that" or said it that way. I have no experience with her, just trying to see a different perspective.

I think it's great you are looking at it from another way. I know that I have said things, especially in an email, that I didn't even realize how they sounded until the other person emailed back and said um................It is true we don't know what brought on that particular email!

We have all done things and said things that we regret later. I am more than willing to give people a second chance. However, this has been a concerted effort with tremendous evidence over the last year or so that the mystery shopping company has been doing anything they possibly can to try to lower shop fees. They are a business, and that is their prerogative. We are private contractors, and we bid and compete for jobs just like any other private contractor. The company has the right to give their work to whoever they see fit. However, the culmination of all of these games--and waiting until the last minute--is in that email. Setting guidelines, saying what someone can pay, and simply saying yes or no is a professional way to deal with contractors. All of these mind games and shifting deadlines--what's reasonable and what's prudent--using verbiage that makes contractors feel scared or out of line for simply asking for what they think is fair.... It has crossed a line. And it's sad. And it clearly cannot be blamed on one or two rogue schedulers. It's coming down from the top. There might be one or two schedulers that don't mind being complicit in the racket, but I guarantee you that the majority of the schedulers hate it just as much as we do.

I've said it before. All of these meet and greets and corporate events and pictures of cardboard Fred at a vineyard and wine tasting with the management team is a huge slap in the face. If the company was so hard up for money that they have to belittle and play mind games with their contractors, they shouldn't be able to afford to do those things. But they do. And it just shows how little they care about us.

Also, the fact that they are trying to condition us to accept lower pay shows that they still need our services when it gets down to it. They might be getting more of the shops filled cheaper, but there is still a significant need for dependable route shoppers when it gets close to the deadline. It is important that we continue to use the remaining leverage we have as a route shopper to protect our career and our way of life. Don't let them scare you or belittle you into accepting work for less pay than you deserve!!!! Why should you accept less money in your pocket so they can have more in their pocket? They sit at home or in an office making plans and strategies on how they can try to pay us less in the future. I guarantee you the corporate bonus structure rewards them for coming in under budget! It also gives them more money to take cardboard Fred to wine tastings at the vineyard!

This doesn't seem isolated. This is the smoking gun, as I stated earlier; however, there has been tremendous evidence overall leading to this.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2022 04:11AM by thunderdeacon.

I will say I did not, by any means, prompt that email. I had not asked for anything for at least a year prior to its writing. But I believe it was an email that a few others got, simultaneously. Moving forward though, and slowly unclenching fists.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2022 03:12AM by purpleicee.

That email was clearly sent to a list and was not in response to one particular person who had asked for so-called egregious bonuses in the past.

I’m sure Carey is under pressure to lower fees in order to increase profits. If you look at Ipsos’ annual report, North America (mystery shopping is just one part of it) did the worst. That is no excuse to be rude and unprofessional. And it’s no excuse to treat longtime shoppers like garbage. They are growing their business by adding new accounts. They are decreasing scheduler fees by having ishopfirst and project managers, and now even Carey, deal directly with shoppers (I have no idea how the pay structure works for schedulers, but if a scheduler is involved one week instead of four, they must be receiving less; one major quarterly project had no scheduler at all and shopper fees were drastically reduced as well). It is a choice to also lower fees paid to shoppers, when they’re already increasing revenue (which theoretically alone is sufficient to turn finances around) and decreasing expenses in other ways.

They post on Facebook that they’ve “listened” and will now have a phone number for shoppers to call with issues. But then the phone is never answered because they’re not actually willing to spend the money it would take to have someone available to answer it. That email in my opinion was not the wrong tone. It was the completely wrong message that had to be on purpose and thought out.

They’re not just paying less than pre-pandemic, they’re paying less than the first Q of this year and significantly less than last year. Less than a year ago they would pay $200 to get certain gas station shops done before the end of the month (even if you lived next door). Now, if you live within 50 miles, it’s “unreasonable” to ask for $50 for that station, and doing so could jeopardize your future work. That is outrageous, egregious, and unreasonable.

So much drama.

@Notme2021 wrote:

They’re not just paying less than pre-pandemic, they’re paying less than the first Q of this year and significantly less than last year. Less than a year ago they would pay $200 to get certain gas station shops done before the end of the month (even if you lived next door). Now, if you live within 50 miles, it’s “unreasonable” to ask for $50 for that station, and doing so could jeopardize your future work. That is outrageous, egregious, and unreasonable.

September 2020 was six month into the pandemic economic shutdown; many outlets were closed or operating at a hugely reduced level. Employees were few and far between, and evaluations were largely canceled.

September 2021 was mid-pandemic. No one understood the Covid illness protocol, hospitals were over capacity, shoppers were few and far between.

You cannot compare 2022 to 2020-2021. A more accurate comparison would be to September 2019.

When did they buy out Maritz? There wasn’t that much time pre-pandemic was there? So it’s hard to compare. My point still stands. It is not “egregious” or “unreasonable” to make a request that is the same or often *less* than a shopper has received for the same work in the past, whether that was pre-pandemic or during the height of it, or in January 2022. Calling it that is rude and unprofessional. If circumstances have changed, then they have changed. Instead of using such language they can say they can no longer pay that. Period. They are threatening shoppers’ future work if they overbid on one project. And overbidding means bidding an amount that was paid in the past, perhaps as recently as Nov 30, 2022, or even sometime in 2022. The only difference I see between Nov 2021 and now, btw, is that [petroleum company] made billions per quarter while gas prices were at record highs, Ipsos recovered their revenue and then some, and there has been general sky-high inflation while shopper fees have gone down. Insofar as the pandemic goes, I don’t really see that much difference since Nov 2021 in my state. And if this is industry-wide, then it’s a problem with the entire industry, but I’ve only heard of one MSC sending such emails.

It seems clear that their contracts have changed (the locations that paid $200 in Nov 2021 to finish by Nov 30, still sit after the end of the month at $40 waiting for someone to pick it up. The locations that paid $60 to finish by Feb 5 sit at $30 or $40. That is not a case of more shoppers: their contract has changed or they have made some other strategic change). And they’re obviously working hard on recruitment at the same time. Since we aren’t privy to their contracts or thinking, again, a simple “sorry we can’t pay that much” would be a problem for full-time shoppers who were counting on the income, but would be polite and professional (not egregious).

quote=ColoKate63]

@Notme2021 wrote:

They’re not just paying less than pre-pandemic, they’re paying less than the first Q of this year and significantly less than last year. Less than a year ago they would pay $200 to get certain gas station shops done before the end of the month (even if you lived next door). Now, if you live within 50 miles, it’s “unreasonable” to ask for $50 for that station, and doing so could jeopardize your future work. That is outrageous, egregious, and unreasonable.

September 2020 was six month into the pandemic economic shutdown; many outlets were closed or operating at a hugely reduced level. Employees were few and far between, and evaluations were largely canceled.

September 2021 was mid-pandemic. No one understood the Covid illness protocol, hospitals were over capacity, shoppers were few and far between.

You cannot compare 2022 to 2020-2021. A more accurate comparison would be to September 2019.[/quote]

In all honesty, I don’t see the mystery shopping industry paying me anything like it used to 4-5 years ago, when I was working full time doing video routes and making very nice money indeed. It may eventually recover, but I’m edging closer to retirement and not interested in the stress anymore.

So I’ve voted with my feet and gone back into teaching math and science, which is how I started doing MS’ing a dozen years ago. I’ll pick up 2-3 shops a day between 4-7 pm on my commute home, just as I used to do, and some on the weekends.

I promise to never do a gas station or any other shop
for less than $25, solidarity to my fellow shoppers!

@sestrahelena wrote:

And, I do not understand how a scheduler - not Karen - makes their money while alienating shoppers with canceled shops, rudeness, crickets and agreed-upon shops that are never placed on the shoppers' log. Seems counter- productive. But they're (one scheduler, specifically) still working and doing the same things over and over.

You are referring to Jennifer Barrick, correct? I would like to know that shoppers other than myself have been alienated and treated poorly by one scheduler with a massive amount of projects.

@patman9760 wrote:

@sestrahelena wrote:

And, I do not understand how a scheduler - not Karen - makes their money while alienating shoppers with canceled shops, rudeness, crickets and agreed-upon shops that are never placed on the shoppers' log. Seems counter- productive. But they're (one scheduler, specifically) still working and doing the same things over and over.

You are referring to Jennifer Barrick, correct? I would like to know that shoppers other than myself have been alienated and treated poorly by one scheduler with a massive amount of projects.

She has been mentioned often, in several threads, by various shoppers. Rarely are the comments favorable. And Shopperbob does not generally perform a high volume of shops, as it seems from his posts, so his luck ratio is better than ours! Correct me if I'm wrong, SB!

@KarenSchedulesForIpsos
LOL you do the same things daily. O I have had you send shops up the change and they were approved by the PM (When I had their email I sent it to them direct). It has been a year since I have been able to get any shop from you.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/07/2022 11:04PM by bmttinman.

This is a perfect example of things being put on the Forum that are one sided. I ALWAYS have to go by what the project manager says as far as bonuses and if we received extremely high bonus requests they are often denied.

You are speaking of PAST project managers and PAST shops - never have you sent me a request and I denied it and then that same request was approved by the project manager. If you are denied bonus from ME it is straight from the project manager.

You have sent requests in early in the project that were denied by the project manager and then later we reached out to you to see if you could still do some of those shops, but again - always the project manager was involved and approved or denied.

Currently the project managers are just not approving the higher requests that you ask for at the times you ask for them. My goal is to fill the shops - it would serve no purpose at all just just flatly deny any requests for shops. When there is a shopper who does an excellent job, gets the shops completed on time and never flakes - believe me, I want to be able to assign that shopper to the shops. And as far as I can remember you have always done an excellent job, so what reason would there be not to get bonuses approved?

The shops you asked about - and started this thread if I recall - were very high and we had just put them on the board. I had spoken to the project manager the day before and had been told that we would not be adding any bonuses at all to those for the time being. So I did not actually send your request in, but I had already been told $0 bonuses for the next 3 weeks at least. I didn't have to email then I could respond to you right away and let you know that we couldn't pay that at this time. It would have been denied to any shopper who asked for that much - at that time it just was not approved.

I am not saying this is anyone in particular - but I will use an example. I received a bonus request for 2 shops for $1400 total. These shops were just put on the board. The shopper would have to travel a distance and had expenses so that is why that fee was asked. When shops are put on the board at $15 or so - we are always going to have to try and find someone more local to these shops to do them for less than $1400. These were not remote locations and we did find a shopper closer to do these shops at whatever the fee was at the time.
Any bonus request I receive goes to the project manager for approval/disproval unless I have a notice from them that at this time they are not accepting ANY bonus requests, and at that point I have to turn down all bonus requests.

I know that pay and bonus requests is a hot topic for shoppers - and I 100% understand that, you have to travel, plan out a route, deal with heat or cold or whatever so whatever you feel you can and will do these shops for - I respect that - if the shops don't pay what you need, you don't have to take them. I have never told a shopper they are unreasonable in what they are asking, or anything of the sort - I may say that I am not sure we can go that high - but I will ask - and then I ask. Whatever I am told is what we have to go with - I have no control over bonuses at all. I personally feel that whatever bonus you feel you want or need, you can ask for - and I will submit it. But there are times that these bonuses just will not be approved.

If you feel that I am not sending in bonus requests to the Project Managers for approval and somehow trying to not give you shops, please email carey.medina@ipsos.com and she can look into it.

Karen, I for one, truly appreciate your participation here on the forum. You help us to understand the inner workings of the system and how difficult scheduling can be. We've read some horror stories from schedulers and editors and I am sure I could never handle it. Would not even want to try! Thank you for sharing your wisdom, insight and encouragement with us!

Thank you. At the end of the day we really have the same goal, right? Shoppers want to shop and schedulers want to fill the shops, so when we work together it works best. I learn a lot from reading what the shoppers have to say here on the forum as well. I like to schedule shops, so I often see ways on here that help me try and do a better job!

I find it hard to imagine that @KarenSchedulesForIpsos has been anything other than helpful. She always responds to the emails I send and often addresses shopper issues on the forum. She has had to inform me that bonuses were not approved, but has always done so in a professional manner.

Thank you. I know that that poster really believes that I just don't approve the bonuses because he used to get them - but its not me cutting the bonuses back. I think we just get frustrated sometimes.