Ipsos and “Freelance isn’t Free” law
Good info! I wonder if I can file a labor complaint remotely. Gotta do some reading about this.
Ipsos probably paid them because it was cheaper than fighting it. Especially since they contract out the editing now from what I've read here.
On the other hand, I'm sure that even though the two contractors who sued Ipsos got their pay, they will no longer have the possibility of earning more with that company. Ipsos will deactivate a shopper for much less and seem to derive satisfaction from it, for reasons real or imagined, just to let the lowly ones who wields the power.
I'm not sure they actually sued them, as there is no record of a lawsuit in NYS against IPSOS (last one was in 2021, and IPSOS was suing a former employee). Sounds like they filed a complaint with the NY Attorney General's office (Which the NY DOL website says is the process for this). Point being, it should be the easy and now it looks like it is. You shouldn't have to sue IPSOS to get paid, and the NY AG office is rightfully enforcing the FIFA Act. Nice to see them doing something useful for a change. 
Is there a link to an article? Love to see workers getting more rights.
I don't know why but when I see the "Freelancer isn't free" I think that the other MSC that do fast food shops for no pay + reimbursement fit the "being sued" category better than IPSOS lol
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2024 02:47PM by kisekinecro.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2024 02:47PM by kisekinecro.
@kisekinecro wrote:
I don't know why but when I see the "Freelancer isn't free" I think that the other MSC that do fast food shops for no pay + reimbursement fit the "being sued" category better than IPSOS lol
Unfortunately, that MSC is based in Atlanta, GA.
@sestrahelena wrote:
On the other hand, I'm sure that even though the two contractors who sued Ipsos got their pay, they will no longer have the possibility of earning more with that company. Ipsos will deactivate a shopper for much less and seem to derive satisfaction from it, for reasons real or imagined, just to let the lowly ones who wields the power.
I would imagine deactivation as a result of the complaint would be considered retaliation and Ipsos could get into trouble for that.
Deactivation for any other reason would be fair game.
@Cassiespark wrote:
I'm not sure they actually sued them, as there is no record of a lawsuit in NYS against IPSOS (last one was in 2021, and IPSOS was suing a former employee). Sounds like they filed a complaint with the NY Attorney General's office (Which the NY DOL website says is the process for this). Point being, it should be the easy and now it looks like it is. You shouldn't have to sue IPSOS to get paid, and the NY AG office is rightfully enforcing the FIFA Act. Nice to see them doing something useful for a change.
Yeah, they filled out a form online. No litigation. I misspoke.
As I have only been, to my recollection, stiffed for $5 back when my approach to shopping was radically different, I can not state from experience. I do know, however, my system of handling disputes is far less involved than seeking assistance from any government agency and, to date, has worked for me.
The above paragraph is neither a criticism of anyone nor a suggestion to employ my manner of resolving disagreements.
The above paragraph is neither a criticism of anyone nor a suggestion to employ my manner of resolving disagreements.
@sestrahelena wrote:
Good info! I wonder if I can file a labor complaint remotely. Gotta do some reading about this.
I would give it a try. If they retaliate by deactivating you, they could get into trouble. I would think the law applies to New York based MSCs; not necessarily New York residents.
@Indastruktable wrote:
@sestrahelena wrote:
On the other hand, I'm sure that even though the two contractors who sued Ipsos got their pay, they will no longer have the possibility of earning more with that company. Ipsos will deactivate a shopper for much less and seem to derive satisfaction from it, for reasons real or imagined, just to let the lowly ones who wields the power.
I would imagine deactivation as a result of the complaint would be considered retaliation and Ipsos could get into trouble for that.
Deactivation for any other reason would be fair game.
I think retaliation only works when you are W9 employees with the company.
MS are independent contractors, which means it is nothing but a B2B relationship which both sides can terminate relationship with each other under no obligations.
I suppose deactivation could come with the territory here, especially if you are in a dispute with a company, (and the IC has the right to deactivate as well), but it is nice to see that companies are being held accountable.
@kisekinecro wrote:
@Indastruktable wrote:
@sestrahelena wrote:
On the other hand, I'm sure that even though the two contractors who sued Ipsos got their pay, they will no longer have the possibility of earning more with that company. Ipsos will deactivate a shopper for much less and seem to derive satisfaction from it, for reasons real or imagined, just to let the lowly ones who wields the power.
I would imagine deactivation as a result of the complaint would be considered retaliation and Ipsos could get into trouble for that.
Deactivation for any other reason would be fair game.
I think retaliation only works when you are W9 employees with the company.
MS are independent contractors, which means it is nothing but a B2B relationship which both sides can terminate relationship with each other under no obligations.
“FIFA” is specifically targeted to protect ICs. W-9s are already protected.
@sestrahelena wrote:
On the other hand, I'm sure that even though the two contractors who sued Ipsos got their pay, they will no longer have the possibility of earning more with that company. Ipsos will deactivate a shopper for much less and seem to derive satisfaction from it, for reasons real or imagined, just to let the lowly ones who wields the power.
Probably not, and it might be a mutual thing. (Wanna work for a company you had to file a government complaint against?) Still, most states have provisions against retaliation against employees. I don't know enough about this law to know if retaliation is forbidden against freelancers.
SA advises--..........end your agreement with them. You don't have to give them an explanation, just do it and move on.
Bob agrees--That works for me. I do not wish to avail myself of government intervention, as that is diametrically opposed to my position of laissez-faire.
Bob agrees--That works for me. I do not wish to avail myself of government intervention, as that is diametrically opposed to my position of laissez-faire.
@ServiceAward wrote:
IPSOS already informs shoppers WHY their shops are declined. I've had several declined and I've always been told why. Only on one occasion I did disagree with them on the reason, but they did tell me their reason. Whether a shopper understands the reason, is another matter.
Is there anybody on this board who has had an IPSOS shop rejected and honestly was never told why? Normally when people come here bit**ing about stuff like that they start out saying they were not told why, then you call BS on it and dig down, they say something like, "Well, they said I did not have a photo of something" or "I took a photo of the wrong thing even I know I knew the guidelines says not to do that, I did it anyway."
The OP does not cite their source, only that "they heard." I want to know the details of the complaints.
Shops are rejected because shoppers f-up. That's not to say the MSC is never wrong - they are, but those instances are not nearly at the level people make them out to be. No company should ever genuinely screw a contractor over, but there are already other remedies available if it comes down to it. This law is government overreach, which isn't surprising coming from New York.
So, if you must, go ahead and file a complaint over a measly $25 that you feel is owed to you. Then, watch as already scarce work dries up even more or, worst, you are blacklisted from doing jobs for any MSC. You're an IC, the MSC does NOT have to use your services. They can terminate the contract you signed for any reason and without explanation. Guess what? You can do the same.
Losing any amount of money sucks, especially when you feel you are right. If a $25 loss or even a $200 loss puts your business in jeopardy, then you are doing something wrong and, more likely, you need to get out of trying to work for yourself and go find a traditional job.
IF you are going to try to do this as a business, then act like a business person. People that run businesses do not sweat over a $25 loss. It is far more important to maintain relationships in the business world as long as it is not a routine thing where a company is screwing you over. If they are, simply follow the very wise @shopperbob's advice and end your agreement with them. You don't have to give them an explanation, just do it and move on.
I appreciate your experience with Ipsos, but it seems you’re making a broad generalization based on your personal situations. Just because you’ve received explanations doesn’t mean others always have. There are many shoppers who’ve had shops declined without a clear or valid reason, and the fact that some people have successfully filed complaints and won back pay shows there are legitimate concerns.
You mention people ‘bit**ing’ and then later admitting to a guideline mistake, but that doesn’t account for instances where MSCs, including Ipsos, might reject shops without proper justification or due process. The law isn’t about protecting people who failed to follow the rules; it’s about ensuring fair treatment for all independent contractors. You also say the ‘Freelance Isn’t Free’ law is government overreach, but I’d argue it’s a necessary protection in an industry where companies hold the power and freelancers often lack the means to fight back.
As for filing complaints over ‘measly’ sums like $25—if it’s so insignificant to you, great. But for many shoppers, especially those who rely on multiple smaller jobs, it adds up. Why should a freelancer, who’s fulfilled their part of the contract, be expected to absorb losses just to maintain a relationship? A business shouldn’t sweat over $25 either, right? So, if they’re wrong, why not just pay what’s owed and move on? No one is advocating filing complaints over a one-time mistake, but when patterns emerge, it’s fair to demand accountability.
Also, being blacklisted for standing up for your rights should never be an accepted consequence in any profession. If maintaining ‘relationships’ means allowing yourself to be mistreated, then that’s a red flag about the companies you’re working with.
Freelancers deserve the same respect as businesses, and enforcing fair pay laws isn’t about putting your business in jeopardy—it’s about ensuring it can thrive without being shortchanged by those who hold more power. Running a business isn’t about quietly accepting unfair losses; it’s about understanding your value and ensuring you’re compensated appropriately for your work.
If not tonight, as I have a shop for Informa due, after I close tomorrow, I will address an extensive counterpoint to Inda's comments.
As always, we are adults and civility is paramount to opining.
As always, we are adults and civility is paramount to opining.
ServiceAward, need a hug? Sending now with a heartfelt, "There, there, now. It'll be okay."
FIFA is specifically for NY state residents.
@Indastruktable wrote:
@sestrahelena wrote:
Good info! I wonder if I can file a labor complaint remotely. Gotta do some reading about this.
I would give it a try. If they retaliate by deactivating you, they could get into trouble. I would think the law applies to New York based MSCs; not necessarily New York residents.
Wow.
I don't know if you are responding to someone you know personally. But, likely you are responding to a stranger with aggression and assumption and frankly just plain rudeness. You have zero clue or proof that this person did something to f-up, and why would you would jump to side with a multi-billion dollar company over a fellow IC...well...wow.
I don't know if you are responding to someone you know personally. But, likely you are responding to a stranger with aggression and assumption and frankly just plain rudeness. You have zero clue or proof that this person did something to f-up, and why would you would jump to side with a multi-billion dollar company over a fellow IC...well...wow.
@ServiceAward wrote:
IPSOS already informs shoppers WHY their shops are declined. I've had several declined and I've always been told why. Only on one occasion I did disagree with them on the reason, but they did tell me their reason. Whether a shopper understands the reason, is another matter.
Is there anybody on this board who has had an IPSOS shop rejected and honestly was never told why? Normally when people come here bit**ing about stuff like that they start out saying they were not told why, then you call BS on it and dig down, they say something like, "Well, they said I did not have a photo of something" or "I took a photo of the wrong thing even I know I knew the guidelines says not to do that, I did it anyway."
The OP does not cite their source, only that "they heard." I want to know the details of the complaints.
Shops are rejected because shoppers f-up. That's not to say the MSC is never wrong - they are, but those instances are not nearly at the level people make them out to be. No company should ever genuinely screw a contractor over, but there are already other remedies available if it comes down to it. This law is government overreach, which isn't surprising coming from New York.
So, if you must, go ahead and file a complaint over a measly $25 that you feel is owed to you. Then, watch as already scarce work dries up even more or, worst, you are blacklisted from doing jobs for any MSC. You're an IC, the MSC does NOT have to use your services. They can terminate the contract you signed for any reason and without explanation. Guess what? You can do the same.
Losing any amount of money sucks, especially when you feel you are right. If a $25 loss or even a $200 loss puts your business in jeopardy, then you are doing something wrong and, more likely, you need to get out of trying to work for yourself and go find a traditional job.
IF you are going to try to do this as a business, then act like a business person. People that run businesses do not sweat over a $25 loss. It is far more important to maintain relationships in the business world as long as it is not a routine thing where a company is screwing you over. If they are, simply follow the very wise @shopperbob's advice and end your agreement with them. You don't have to give them an explanation, just do it and move on.
Um, I have had shops rejected where they give me clear justifications, but it doesn't mean the justifications were correct.
As someone who does shops in volume, I usually just let it go, knowing there are an equal amount of times they cut me some slack and approve shops where I missed something. But for someone who does only a few shops, and does not treat it as a business, getting an unwarranted rejection can really sting.
And, come on, all of us here know the recent dummification of the shop guidelines is designed to draw in new shoppers who aren't aware of the unwritten requirements that used to be spelled out in more detail. I understand it's designed to be less intimidating, but a more cynical person might describe it as a classic bait and switch.
As someone who does shops in volume, I usually just let it go, knowing there are an equal amount of times they cut me some slack and approve shops where I missed something. But for someone who does only a few shops, and does not treat it as a business, getting an unwarranted rejection can really sting.
And, come on, all of us here know the recent dummification of the shop guidelines is designed to draw in new shoppers who aren't aware of the unwritten requirements that used to be spelled out in more detail. I understand it's designed to be less intimidating, but a more cynical person might describe it as a classic bait and switch.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.