However, we do ask that all participants respect the rights of others to communicate in whatever manner they wish, positive or negative, and TRY to behave respectfully toward one another when conflicts in views or opinions arise.
Our goal is to create an environment where examiners can speak openly and honestly without the restrictions of forced diplomacy or the constraints of having to observe over-bearing rules of political correctness.
I always ask agent to ask underwriting for specifics as to what they want so as to support change if needed to billing company but I am beginning to believe at best:
Payments are delayed- and then may somehow "get lost". But if are paid....even after you did the work- you can get the worst.
Billing company pays and charges back at whatever time they feel is right for them. Which can come 3 months later or at the end of the year" which means you get a short check at a bad time."
So I am just asking what others do because I am sure I am not by myself on this one.
Also if the EC's can bill for no- shows why can't we as independents bill for the same? My billing company says they can't bill for no-shows but if I do something for them- they can bill for that and I get something. What's up with that?
also requested of the agent to forward the request from underwriting, explaining to( him,her )this is not listed as a required service and I need to
have proof if I'm charged back.
This is not just do it any more.
The same way as when a PC bills for them. They don't.Looking at it from the IC's point of view, there is no accountability from direct examiners for no-shows. How do they KNOW you had an appointment set with a client and got no-showed?
There's no accountability from either directs or PCs because there's no way to prove it. Which is what so many ICs use as an excuse to not pay for no shows. And it's bullshit. They both know no shows happen all the time but neither wants to pay for them so they expect (or try to get) examiners to eat them.
Their reason is "we don't want it getting abused". So instead of dealing with examiners who do abuse it, they take a global "nobody gets paid for no shows" position.
The bottom line is they both get around paying for legitimate no shows except when they're dealing with examiners who are smart enough to demand no show fees as part of their work agreement/contract. I won't work for any PC who doesn't pay me at least $10 for no shows.
And don't kid yourself, the PCs don't have the muscle to get the money. If they had any muscle (or brains), none of the ICs would get away with having policies of not paying for no shows. It wouldn't be an option.
And does anybody ever consider that the rates we're paid are more in line with what we should be paid if they were to come to us?
$10 or $15 dollars for a no show if they were coming to us would be reasonable, but to only have it be that much when we go to them is ridiculous when you really think about it.
Maybe thinking about it in that context will make people stop and think about how poorly we get paid for what we bring to the table.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest