My bad, I got way off topic. When ACA got brought up, I was speaking more about my own personal situation recently. Not specifically tied to or in relation to independent contactor vs employee classification. The high cost of premiums with COBRA in my case is largely due to the industry I work in, where benefits and equity are large components of the overall compensation package.

@Karenhal I'm not familiar with the shops, but sorry to hear what happened!

This was the fourth BE that I mystery shopped. The first three (at regular rate of pay) received a ten rating. Ironically this shop was a bonus shop due to the location. I was told by cashier that BE goods were not sold at this location due to theft issues. This was in the report.

@Karenhal wrote:

This was the fourth BE that I mystery shopped. The first three (at regular rate of pay) received a ten rating. Ironically this shop was a bonus shop due to the location. I was told by cashier that BE goods were not sold at this location due to theft issues. This was in the report.

You can try writing to the CEO. I got my pay reduced and appealed to the CEO and it was reinstated.

Thank you.

@Indastruktable wrote:

I heard that two individuals successfully sued Ipsos for unpaid wages. Since Ipsos operates in New York, they are subject to the state’s ‘Freelance Isn’t Free’ law. This law requires companies to provide clear justifications for rejecting a shop. If a shopper challenges a rejection, Ipsos must present solid evidence showing why the shop is unusable; otherwise, they are obligated to pay. If Ipsos receives too many complaints, they could face fines of up to $25,000.

These two shoppers filed their complaint with the New York State Department of Labor in early September and received their back pay just this Tuesday.

Both of these shoppers live in New York, so it’s unclear whether the law applies only to New Yorkers. However, any mystery shopping company based in New York that withholds payment could face serious legal trouble.

Indastruktable: Close to a year ago I started a thread about the possibility of ‘class action lawsuits’ being imposed on the most frequent MSC offender, Ipsos, for their unfair practices against ICs. It was met with a lot of half baked BS from people who wanted to either brown nose - knowing that Ipsos spies are a presence on this board - or impose their own personal experience with them over mine in a condescending way. Some strongly rejected the thought of being considered an ‘employee’ of the MSC, with the point of it going way over their heads.

I backed up my reasoning for the possibility of a class action suit by sharing facts about the changes that took place on the federal level to protect ICs , which commenced on 3/11/2024. That info was ignored by the OPs. Since that deadline I’ve seen changes in how Ipsos handles their below minimum wage shops. They’ve become more ‘squirrelly’ but have not fully changed their ways, probably due to the fact that there are still people willing to pick the low hanging fruit, who they can continue to take advantage of. I stated that there was no reason given for rejecting the shop I performed (which they were forced to pay because they couldn’t find one) and Ipsos appeared to be running out the clock on the high paying, ‘last minute’ shop in the boonies as a way to get something for nothing. When I sounded the alarm that this was happening with their higher ups, one was extremely nasty and her boss deactivated my account right after it was paid.

Some of the responses to my post stated that there simply wasn’t enough people to start a lawsuit, using some flawed calculus. Others stated it wasn’t worth getting banned. They would accept the loss, which makes it harder on the rest of us. Exposing their actions and reporting it to the proper authorities will eventually lead to a class action lawsuit, and those members will profit far more than the naysayers get for putting up with their abuse.

Ipsos doesn’t value their ICs enough to work out any issues with the shops. They’re always MIA, and now that they've imposed the midnight deadline for the submitted shops to go POOF, the ICs have no proof they completed the shop to spec. Ipsos obviously won’t tell anyone they’ve been banned, but that’s the punishment rendered for not taking their sh* t. It’s a well known fact. The dumb mistake NYS made was imposing a minimum earnings amount before a complaint can be heard, if what the OP stated is true. Ipsos will ensure the IC will never make enough $ to get that far. They leave theICs who have sacrificed the most for them scratching their heads, wondering what rose to the level of being devalued and ignored. There’s no ‘relationship building’ with that lousy, cut throat company.

Nothing is stopping you from trying to find an attorney who will take the Class Action Suit that you are proposing.

@Minime wrote:

@Indastruktable wrote:

I heard that two individuals successfully sued Ipsos for unpaid wages. Since Ipsos operates in New York, they are subject to the state’s ‘Freelance Isn’t Free’ law. This law requires companies to provide clear justifications for rejecting a shop. If a shopper challenges a rejection, Ipsos must present solid evidence showing why the shop is unusable; otherwise, they are obligated to pay. If Ipsos receives too many complaints, they could face fines of up to $25,000.

These two shoppers filed their complaint with the New York State Department of Labor in early September and received their back pay just this Tuesday.

Both of these shoppers live in New York, so it’s unclear whether the law applies only to New Yorkers. However, any mystery shopping company based in New York that withholds payment could face serious legal trouble.

Indastruktable: Close to a year ago I started a thread about the possibility of ‘class action lawsuits’ being imposed on the most frequent MSC offender, Ipsos, for their unfair practices against ICs. It was met with a lot of half baked BS from people who wanted to either brown nose - knowing that Ipsos spies are a presence on this board - or impose their own personal experience with them over mine in a condescending way. Some strongly rejected the thought of being considered an ‘employee’ of the MSC, with the point of it going way over their heads.

I backed up my reasoning for the possibility of a class action suit by sharing facts about the changes that took place on the federal level to protect ICs , which commenced on 3/11/2024. That info was ignored by the OPs. Since that deadline I’ve seen changes in how Ipsos handles their below minimum wage shops. They’ve become more ‘squirrelly’ but have not fully changed their ways, probably due to the fact that there are still people willing to pick the low hanging fruit, who they can continue to take advantage of. I stated that there was no reason given for rejecting the shop I performed (which they were forced to pay because they couldn’t find one) and Ipsos appeared to be running out the clock on the high paying, ‘last minute’ shop in the boonies as a way to get something for nothing. When I sounded the alarm that this was happening with their higher ups, one was extremely nasty and her boss deactivated my account right after it was paid.

Some of the responses to my post stated that there simply wasn’t enough people to start a lawsuit, using some flawed calculus. Others stated it wasn’t worth getting banned. They would accept the loss, which makes it harder on the rest of us. Exposing their actions and reporting it to the proper authorities will eventually lead to a class action lawsuit, and those members will profit far more than the naysayers get for putting up with their abuse.

Ipsos doesn’t value their ICs enough to work out any issues with the shops. They’re always MIA, and now that they've imposed the midnight deadline for the submitted shops to go POOF, the ICs have no proof they completed the shop to spec. Ipsos obviously won’t tell anyone they’ve been banned, but that’s the punishment rendered for not taking their sh* t. It’s a well known fact. The dumb mistake NYS made was imposing a minimum earnings amount before a complaint can be heard, if what the OP stated is true. Ipsos will ensure the IC will never make enough $ to get that far. They leave theICs who have sacrificed the most for them scratching their heads, wondering what rose to the level of being devalued and ignored. There’s no ‘relationship building’ with that lousy, cut throat company.

I worked for a merchandising company that required reporting be done on “your time”. I had proof of this. I filed a report with Wage, Hour and Labor as throughout the USA as we were employees. Over 400 merchandisers received approximately $2,000 and up per person.

I understand IC work is a different classification. Also $20. for food reimbursement and a “bonus” $15. fee is not a large amount of money. Needless to say, it still is not right that I was not paid. I did write an email to the editor. A very snarky email was written back to me. It basically called me a liar. I have excellent vision, and my full mental facilities. There was no merchandise for sale at this BE due to theft. There definitely was a reason this shop was still on the job board. The irony is that this was a bonus shop. The other three that I did were at the regular rate of pay. I received a 10 rating for those shops.

Prior posts state that IC was not paid and deactivated over a bonus shop by this same company. Hmmmm—

It is insulting and rude to treat people like this.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2024 05:04PM by Karenhal.

I predict that things will get so bad that at least one of the hard-working shoppers on this board will start a class-action claim against one or more MS companies in the next year or two. I can think of several misbehaving MS companies that could be candidates.

That’s awesome Karenhal. Merchandizing is another thankless, short-lived and unprofitable endeavor for most people who attempt it. I tried it briefly and had a manager who cracked the whip and made unreasonable demands. It was all about her getting ahead and she let it be known you were disposable. The guy they employed to train me for a next level job was invading my personal space throughout the first day, which made me very uncomfortable and disgusted. When I explained why there wouldn’t be a day 2 to management they backed him 100%, so I quit. There’s such a thing as a ‘female misogynist’ and the low level managers in these companies for the most part seem to possess those tendencies. They’re sought after since it’s easy to make them the villain.

Amen

Thank you for your post.

The horror stories of working 12 years for this company will never be forgotten. I was widowed and it was survival. Unfortunately Wage, Hour and Labor only went back a certain period of time for review.

@Minime wrote:

Indastruktable: Close to a year ago I started a thread about the possibility of ‘class action lawsuits’ being imposed on the most frequent MSC offender, Ipsos, for their unfair practices against ICs. It was met with a lot of half baked BS from people who wanted to either brown nose - knowing that Ipsos spies are a presence on this board - or impose their own personal experience with them over mine in a condescending way. Some strongly rejected the thought of being considered an ‘employee’ of the MSC, with the point of it going way over their heads.

I backed up my reasoning for the possibility of a class action suit by sharing facts about the changes that took place on the federal level to protect ICs , which commenced on 3/11/2024. That info was ignored by the OPs. Since that deadline I’ve seen changes in how Ipsos handles their below minimum wage shops. They’ve become more ‘squirrelly’ but have not fully changed their ways, probably due to the fact that there are still people willing to pick the low hanging fruit, who they can continue to take advantage of. I stated that there was no reason given for rejecting the shop I performed (which they were forced to pay because they couldn’t find one) and Ipsos appeared to be running out the clock on the high paying, ‘last minute’ shop in the boonies as a way to get something for nothing. When I sounded the alarm that this was happening with their higher ups, one was extremely nasty and her boss deactivated my account right after it was paid.

Some of the responses to my post stated that there simply wasn’t enough people to start a lawsuit, using some flawed calculus. Others stated it wasn’t worth getting banned. They would accept the loss, which makes it harder on the rest of us. Exposing their actions and reporting it to the proper authorities will eventually lead to a class action lawsuit, and those members will profit far more than the naysayers get for putting up with their abuse.

Ipsos doesn’t value their ICs enough to work out any issues with the shops. They’re always MIA, and now that they've imposed the midnight deadline for the submitted shops to go POOF, the ICs have no proof they completed the shop to spec. Ipsos obviously won’t tell anyone they’ve been banned, but that’s the punishment rendered for not taking their sh* t. It’s a well known fact. The dumb mistake NYS made was imposing a minimum earnings amount before a complaint can be heard, if what the OP stated is true. Ipsos will ensure the IC will never make enough $ to get that far. They leave theICs who have sacrificed the most for them scratching their heads, wondering what rose to the level of being devalued and ignored. There’s no ‘relationship building’ with that lousy, cut throat company.

I believe this law was created primarily as some sort of protection for ICs who work for ride share companies (Über, Lyft, etc…)

With that said, you’re absolutely right—Ipsos has built a pattern of exploiting independent contractors, hiding behind policies that make it difficult to hold them accountable. Your experience really highlights how they operate: pushing ICs to take on shops that barely pay enough, rejecting reports without proper feedback, and creating arbitrary deadlines that wipe out any trace of completed work. It’s frustrating, and I understand why you’d raise the possibility of a class action lawsuit to address these unfair practices.

The lack of transparency and accountability from Ipsos is exactly why so many ICs feel powerless. And when some choose to overlook these issues or dismiss them, it only strengthens Ipsos’s position. They bank on the fact that people will tolerate the abuse, thinking there’s no viable recourse or that it’s too risky to challenge them.

Your mention of federal changes to IC protections on 3/11/2024 is a valuable point—those laws were designed to make companies treat ICs fairly and protect them from exactly the kind of exploitative practices you’re describing. This should make Ipsos more accountable, and I agree that if more people reported these issues, it could eventually lead to serious consequences for them. A class action lawsuit would not only address compensation but would also set a precedent, showing companies like Ipsos that they can’t continue this way without repercussions.

For anyone reading this thread who’s experiencing similar treatment, it’s worth documenting everything, from guidelines to email threads, so there’s a record of what you were asked to do and the efforts you put in. Even with the midnight deadline policy, any evidence of discrepancies can build a case. And for those in states without strong IC protections, federal agencies like the FTC might still be an option.

Your persistence in raising awareness is important. Standing up to Ipsos, whether individually or as part of a larger effort, can eventually drive the change that’s needed. It’s about time ICs were treated with respect and fairness.

I agree 100 percent.

1. It only takes one person for a class action lawsuit. That one person becomes the class representative on which the lawsuit is based for all people who are similarly situated. The larger the class, the smaller the settlement. You may have received post cards in the mail about these kinds of settlements which can be applied for or not according to their personal wishes.

2. For employment purposes, please see my other posts. Lawyers use Uber drivers and cab drivers as examples of misclassified ICs, and use that to point to similarities with other misclassified ICs who are secretly employees based on the means test.

3. Again, when you direct your own work and can hire others to work under you to complete a job, you are the true independent contractor. I keep hoping that people will understand it so that they can stick up for themselves.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/06/2024 05:06AM by cherubino3.