Go Back   WAHM Forums - WAHM.com > Work-At-Home Professions > Web & Office > Google Rater

Welcome to the WAHM Forums - WAHM.com.

Welcome to WAHM Forums

Already registered? Login above 

OR

To take advantage of all the site's features, become a member of the largest community of Work-At-Home Moms.

The advertising to the left will not show if you are a registered user.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 12:27 PM
WAHM Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 162
Default

Mess18: I think you're on or reasonably close to the mark. I hope so, anyway, because I second your emotion.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

This ad is not displayed to registered and logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on WAHM!

  #32 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 04:37 PM
Super WAHM
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 370
Default

The problem I see here with Leapforce is that they want you to be an independent contractor. they don' t pay your federal or state taxes. You are responsible for all the tax liabilities, which frankly, even though I've done this is a pain in the butt. You have to pay your own State, Federal and Social Security taxes and figure out how much to pay. They just get you the job, take a fee of what you are paid, and basically do nothing else. If they don't pay as much as WFL, and I don't see any pay scale there...

Also I don't find anything on site to legitamize them. Other than an address and phone number. Someone mentioned better business bureau, you could try to find out if they have a legit EIN. Their application, I didn't want to try and "mock" up something, but if they ask for anything other than resume, phone #...meaning if they ask for SSN or more personal information, not a good sign in my opinion.

Just use your best judgement, they might be legit, I don't know, but they don't want WFL people so I wont' bother with them.

__________________
hugs,
Sticks
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 07:21 PM
Super WAHM
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess18
I don't know about Leapforce, and who they are actually hiring for since they are secretive about it, but Lionbridge is not hiring raters right now. As for WFL, they are hiring three different rater positions right now on behalf of Google on Google's own website. Work has been great the last couple of weeks. Work has been readily available whenever I've logged on, and I've easily gotten 30 hours per week.

There may be other agencies hiring raters from time to time (Kelly, Lionbridge) but WFL is the only agency Google actually has listed on their own website, so they seem the most legitimate to me. With WFL, raters are actually W2 employees. Leapforce, even if they are hiring raters, only offer a 6 month contract for ICs. They say they aren't hiring WFL raters because if we knew the reason it would be "rather bothersome" to us. What is that suppose to mean? I'm sure we would be bothered by a shorter contract and less money! I feel very lucky to have been hired by WFL.
Hi Mess,

I think that maybe right now Google may be feeling out other temporary companies as well. I think the WFL positions are listed on the Google website because WFL is acutally onsite with Google.

As far as Leapforce goes, they have no obligation to tell us why or why not they are hiring us. It could be due to a whole "non-compete" type of thing. It is sort of like LB telling me that they won't hire in California (even though they have an branch here).
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 08:18 PM
Super WAHM
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location:
Posts: 275
Default


Quote:
Originally Posted by ldawg317
Hi Mess,

I think that maybe right now Google may be feeling out other temporary companies as well. I think the WFL positions are listed on the Google website because WFL is acutally onsite with Google.

As far as Leapforce goes, they have no obligation to tell us why or why not they are hiring us. It could be due to a whole "non-compete" type of thing. It is sort of like LB telling me that they won't hire in California (even though they have an branch here).
I agree, that is basically what I was saying. They have tested out other companies in the past, so they may be doing the same thing now. WFL is onsite at Google, so I'm just saying that I don't think they would be completely out.

As for Leapforce, I know they don't have an obligation to tell us anything. I may have applied there once my two years are up, but now I know not to waste my time. I just thought the comment about how it would be "rather bothersome" to WFL raters if they knew why they weren't eligible was a little funny. Honestly, I think WFL raters are over qualified! LOL
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 09:09 PM
WAHM Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 162
Default


The problem I see here with Leapforce is that they want you to be an independent contractor.

Me, too. The IC set-up effectively lowers the hourly wage, because you are responsible for both ends of the SS tax and IC requires a lot more record-keeping, which can be a pain in the neck (or lower). As long as W stays withits current set-up, I would not be interested in Leapforce.

As far as Leapforce goes, they have no obligation to tell us why or why
not they are hiring us. It could be due to a whole "non-compete" type
of thing.

In that case, how difficult would it be to say "we're not able to hire raters who have been previously employed through W, because there is a 'non-compete' agreement in place." (Or fill in the blank with whatever reason applies.)

I'm most concerned with the possibility that these other companies have been made aware of who has worked for W in the past. There's nothing bad in my work history, but I did not give anyone the right to release it to another company and I would be disappointed in W and/or G if they did.





Edited by: Dragon85
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 11:33 PM
WAHM Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 117
Default

FWIW, I don't think the Leapforce rep was saying that their reason for not hiring WFL raters would be bothersome to us, only that the fact that they do not hire ex-WFL raters would be bothersome.

As in, he knows that there are a lot of raters & former raters on here so he knows it probably bothers us that we are not eligible. Not that their actual reason for excluding us is troubling.

Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 02-07-2009, 11:34 PM
WAHM Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 117
Default


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon85
The problem I see here with Leapforce is that they want you to be an independent contractor.

Me, too. The IC set-up effectively lowers the hourly wage, because you are responsible for both ends of the SS tax and IC requires a lot more record-keeping, which can be a pain in the neck (or lower). As long as W stays withits current set-up, I would not be interested in Leapforce.

As far as Leapforce goes, they have no obligation to tell us why or why
not they are hiring us. It could be due to a whole "non-compete" type
of thing.

In that case, how difficult would it be to say "we're not able to hire raters who have been previously employed through W, because there is a 'non-compete' agreement in place." (Or fill in the blank with whatever reason applies.)

I'm most concerned with the possibility that these other companies have been made aware of who has worked for W in the past. There's nothing bad in my work history, but I did not give anyone the right to release it to another company and I would be disappointed in W and/or G if they did.

I'm very curious about this. I was rejected, but I do have G on my resume. Has anyone else who was rejected confirmed that WFL/G was *not* on their resume?
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 02-08-2009, 06:25 AM
Registered WAHM
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location:
Posts: 10
Default


Quote:
Originally Posted by kittenish
FWIW, I don't think the Leapforce rep was saying that their reason for not hiring WFL raters would be bothersome to us, only that the fact that they do not hire ex-WFL raters would be bothersome.

As in, he knows that there are a lot of raters & former raters on here so he knows it probably bothers us that we are not eligible. Not that their actual reason for excluding us is troubling.
Hmmm.... well.. none of us knows what he's really thinking, but I read it to be just the opposite.

My thought is the reason they are excluding us is that the expectations are much different. We know there's the contractor issue where we have to pay both employer and employee SS, thus lowering effective wages....

....but also, the hourly rate might be less.... and, the hourly expectations might be much higher......and they don't want people who are used to the pace of work at WFL.... they'd rather find new people who are really hungry with no expectations ......just an opinion

__________________
RS in Calif
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 02-08-2009, 09:24 AM
WAHM Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 162
Default


The Leapforce spokesman (Daren) who posted in another thread, referenced a post from the Official Google Blog:

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/search-evaluation-at-google.html

I was previously unaware of this post and didn't realize G had "gone public" to such an extent regarding what raters actually do. There's even a use of specific terminology which (in light of recent communications) I found particularly ironic. (Or maybe particularly coincidental, that Alanis Morrisette song has left me perpetually confused)



Edited by: Dragon85
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 02-08-2009, 11:16 PM
Super WAHM
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 220
Default

Well, I'm guessing that if you didn't put down that you worked for WFL on your resume, they would eventually find out through a background check. Anyways, I guess it is what it is, and I better keep looking. It's wierd because I never even got an email back saying that I wasn't qualified. I guess they just got really busy.
Reply With Quote
 
This ad will disappear if you login

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off