www.workmarket.com workmarket work market http://www.workmarket.com workmarket.com Work Market Inc. www.workmarket.com Calling on Pro's to work for free! New York New York

First, let me tell you I'm no cheerleader for Work Market (WM).  Of the several platforms I get work from, WM is the worst one by far when it comes to standing up for its techs.  I had a situation where I completed the work properly and on time, and submitted documentation as per the work order rules...and the company did not pay me for months.  I asked for help from WM support and was essentially told "Nope, you're on your own."  That is neither reasonable nor professional.  I know that on the Onforce (OF) platform--the gold standard by which all other platforms should be judged--that would NEVER happen. 

Indeed, several times over the years (I've been with OF since 2006) I had situations where payment didn't come within a reasonable time and every time, OF paid me from the service buyer's escrowed account money themselves.  I had one of those service buyers call me directly and blister me about it, and I simply replied "I lived up to my obligations.  It's too bad you had to be forced to live up to yours."  Workmarket doesn't care if its techs get paid at all.  And if it's so unreasonable to expect the platform to hold BOTH parties to the rules, why then does Onforce do exactly that so effectively.  I could go on, about how utterly dysfunctional the WM website is, software-wise,and numerous other gripes I have about them, but this is a rebuttal.

To wit: this complainant did not get ripped off by Work Market or the service buyer.  The complainant gave away the money.  Sure, it does seem a little petty to deny payment based on a barely-late submission of deliverables.  However, the work order stipulated in plain language (they always do, even on WM) that late submission of deliverables would result in zero payment.  The complainant knew that before he ever went to do the job.  Or he would have had he done what he should and read the work order in full.  If he did not approve of that particular rule,he shoud never have taken the job to begin with.  Sure, that rule is (as I already said) a bit small-minded but it is not unreasonable to expect each party to an agreement to expect the other to follow rules that are part of the agreement.

Work Market is, without doubt, one of the worst platforms, primarily because their platform is structured in such a way that it's easy for service buyers to stick it to techs, with impunity.  But this Report is not one of those.  It's simply a juvenile complaint from a malcontent who is upset because the service buyer actually held him to the rules he agreed on.  Imagine that!

Full disclosure: I have done some work for My Computer Works through WM and another platform.  I never had any problem getting paid, and that in a timely manner, because I do the work properly and follow their rules.  This part of the "Ripoff" Report should be ignored.

I do strongly agree about how abysmally bad iYogi is.  Dishonest, nagging, whining, unscrupulous, and will wheedle, manipulate, and even take underhanded action in an attempt to pay as little as possible.  I have long ignored their work orders when they were published on the platform.  But they even began calling me asking me to take work from them, usually for an hours-long job of malware remediation for which they want to pay $45.  That is not just wildly unreasonable, it's insulting.  I finally took to cursing them out and hanging up on them after, and that finally ended the phone calls from them.  Some time ago they started creeping on to another platform, Field Nation.  Didn't last, so far as I have been able to tell as I haven't seen an iYogi work order on FN in a long time.  Probably because FN is quick to put the boot in the a** of service buyers for such contemptable behavior as is given free reign on Work Market.