@Karilil You cannot send an HO a message without ‘applying’. There is no separate messaging option. What we do- if we have questions that would be dealbreakers us is to ‘apply’ but tell the HO that it’s not a formal application… just yet…as we have a few questions.
If we just want to make a connection re- a desirable looking sit we will send the HO a msg I.e ‘apply’ and then, after sending, cancel the ‘application’ The application space will be freed up for other applicants but the message will remain and permanent contact with that host will be established.
4 Likes
THS should also not want hosts to think they can cancel on a whim – but they can and they do.
5 Likes
This works without impacting on the listing unless you are the fifth applicant, in which case the listing will go to ‘reviewing’ status and the pet parent will have to unpause the listing after you withdraw your application.
3 Likes
Agreed. What’s sauce for the goose should also be sauce for the gander…
2 Likes
@Happypets that’s true, and I’m aware of it, but If an HO is on the case and monitoring their listing properly they will soon see what has happened and unpause their listing again. We are only talking about one more applicant before they’d be ‘reviewing’ anyway.
THS is responsible for this unfortunate restriction and if I don’t want to miss the chance to make contact (as I always could do before) I will continue this policy- if needed. Sometimes you just gotta think of no.1! 
2 Likes
@Lokstar I totally agree, and we do the same!
2 Likes
So many cases (not talking about THS) where people are murdered and murderer takes their phone and continues to text the people they text on a regular basis. That is one reason I am against texting exclusively as your means of communication. Have at least one person you call at least twice a week and have them know your voice.
wow, that just escalated @Peri 
1 Like
@Peri I prefer to go through life with a pinch of cynicism and a smidge of caution but on the whole accept that the vast majority of people are kind and not looking to kill me in my bed (husband excluded if I am snoring 
). I believe that stats indicate people are far more likely to be murdered by someone they know than complete strangers. Always sensible for solo travellers to let loved ones know where they are going and check in but not sure about the voice call - my daughter would likely kill me if I suggested a voice call weekly, text/ WhatsApp only for that Gen Z’er 
4 Likes
I was taking your points one by one. I stated I agreed with some parts of what you said – like education and the need to change how the calendar works. But I think some sitters feel that there is a power imbalance. The power imbalance that I see is a fundamental one that THS can’t change: Hosts control the resource of the home. Hosts decide whether or not to accept a sitter. That fundamental is not going to change. That’s a similar fundamental if I want an accomodation on airbnb and the host read that I previously trashed a room, or decides for whatever reason to accept someone else who tried to book at the same time.
But sitters control their own decisions. They are like “buyers” in this equation. They can take a sit or not take a sit. That is a power they have. The main need is for honest disclosure by the hosts, and that’s a part that could be improved – maybe by education, or the blind reviews, or some change in policies.
The point about the sitter’s calendar, I don’t disagree with you, but there are certainly some sitters who don’t mind invites even if they don’t always accept them. But I agree the ability to control the calendar should be in the hands of the sitter. But I think this is just part of the limited not always great tech, not a company policy of making the sitters uncomfortable. And I do think if enough sitter/members reached out both on forums and in actual email complaints, the complany might eventual get the message to improve this.
In the homeowner role, I’ve always waited until my trip dates were firm before posting for a sitter, but as a sitter, I’ve occassionally come up against small date changes that I found about during the chat. I don’t think that deserves a “reprimand.” I understand your point about trying to put together a full time calendar and that might be frustrating, but there are all kinds of reasons a sit might not work out once you are talking to a host, and that’s one of them. It feels like something you could easily work around by reading the entire application before you apply to see if there is a mention of the dates not being firm and/or asking the homeowner in your application whether or not the dates are firm because you want to make sure you don’t have conflicts.
I’ve also had sitters approach asking about changes, which are almost always not convenient and would involve my paying a neighbor to come in, so it’s annoying to me when it gets up to a chat, and the sitter suddenly tells me they cannot in fact get there when I need them there. But in those cases the sitter doesn’t get “reprimanded” by THS. This is just stuff that happens when two people are trying to make an agreement. They aren’t always well matched.
I also agree with you that being a combined member probably makes it easier for me to get “trust” from hosts, but I think part of how I’m treated is how I approach things, and I’ve just point black backed away from the process when I felt they didn’t have the same understanding of the exchange I did. You can’t blame THS as a “service” if some members who happen to be hosts are not very nice. Anyone can be a member, and maybe with the blind ratings hosts who are inhospitable or don’t mention extra tasks or important pet information will get called out.
But here’s the thing: THS is slow to “reprimand” anyone unless there is a dispute meaning one member host or sitter reports something. If they are siding with hosts more, maybe it’s because hosts are initiating the dispute process more. I’ve read too many forum posts where sitters are scared to stand up for themselves because they are afraid of reviews, but at the same time sitters also seem afraid to leave honest tough reviews for hosts. When you as a sitter agree to conditions you don’t feel good about, you are giving up your own power. That’s a “you” decision. It’s not the fault of THS.
3 Likes
I see what you’re saying with that. I meant it more so for equality and the fact that I’ve been doing more “local” or non travel related sits recently where I live. But for equality purposes, maybe the cancellation aspect should just be left entirely up to THS mods and not in the hands of the HO’s at all.
Is there a reason you think a background check would lose a lot of homeowners? I find it another measure of security and peace of mind as it brings that to HO’s about sitters. I understand there are other components to operating safely in this world but we all pay a membership fee to be on this site and I just don’t really get why it’s one sided.
I agree and I would even go further, not leaving honest reviews and accepting conditions that we consider unfair or that are against T&Cs without reporting them not only makes us individually lose power but also have an impact in the group, be it sitters or HOs and it certainly does a poor service to the “education” factor that has been mentioned.
6 Likes
There is of course the fundamental power imbalance that THS can’t change: The host does in fact control the resource of the home. Which is why I was pointing out with 1-5 why there are some imbalances that could be changed by THS in order to even the playing field a little rather than it feeling like homeowners have majority power in the situation and sitters are left to feel like a service at the end of an experience instead of what should be a mutual exchange since we all pay to be on here.
I also wasn’t saying that sitters can’t or don’t control their own decisions (hence my suggestion for an education component) but I do feel sitters are already in a one down power position just simply as the “buyer” and not the “seller” in this situation. In this anology of being a buyer, the assumption is that the homeowner as the seller has a huge incentive to cater to the market (me) but in fact they don’t. They hold the majority power say like Amazon and control the market, therefore leaving the buyer with the choice of buy or don’t but not offering much compromise in terms of willingness to be more appealing to a buyer. This is obviously not all cases with HO listings, there are so many great ones but there are also some really not great ones in terms of how it is viewed as a mutual exchange. Do I think they need to be kicked off? Not necessarily if they can actually find someone to do the sit but I think that the ability to spray and pray message people to try and secure a sitter is an abuse of the power to send unsolicited messages and should be addressed by THS.
I’m not saying the people aren’t responsible for their actions but I am saying that when certain privileges are given to certain groups and then it’s expected of them to be on their best behaviour- it causes an imbalance like we see now and many have commented in other threads on this forum about.
The leniency, flexibility, and control that HO’s are awarded over sitters in the first 4 categories are really the bulk of what I think are imbalances. The last one can be seen as a both sides have unrealistic expectations sometimes and I get that. I just think because of the already implied power deference to HO’s because they own the property, the unrealistic expectations lean more in the realm of homeowners not understanding how this is a mutual exchange rather than sitters abusing HO generosity.
1 Like
I find that I tread lightly with some of the reviews because even if it wasn’t something I would want to do again, I can’t assume someone else wouldn’t. Which is why I will leave clues in my commentary about certain elements that were unexpected or out of the ordinary or in some cases I will describe as goofy (animal behaviour specifically) where I assume sitters will read between the lines. It’s not the greatest approach but it’s been a habit since before the blind review system and I haven’t gotten bold enough to outright be negative. Because again, if it wasn’t bad enough to contact THS then I don’t feel it’s bad enough to report in a way that negatively reflects the HO and animals. Is it giving away my power? I don’t know, I look at it more of an act of understanding and being open to the idea that just because something annoyed me it may not bother someone else. Sometimes I do doubt myself in situations where I feel like the HO has treated me poorly and blaming myself for not asking more questions or being more assertive but I guess I don’t know how to translate that to a review sometimes. It feels like I’m giving a subjective experience that may only apply to me…and in the end, is that helpful to others? Anyway, not to digress too far but I think the review process is still nuanced in the way that it’s not cut and dry how to review unpleasant experiences facilitated by an already exacerbated power imbalance that are not necessarily worthy of being “reported”. They are the dynamics we are presented with in the THS sphere and feels even more delicate when you have less power on how to navigate.
3 Likes
I completely understand that and if it is a minor issue that you are not sure about how to mention or whether you should mention it at all, I think that is honest, too. But then you add
In my opinion, this attitude just contributes to increasing the other party’s power regardless of THS sphere. If someone’s boss treats them in a unacceptable manner and they are allowed to do so because of the imbalance in power (in that case the imbalance is totally obvious and objective) their inadequate behaviour will continue or even escalate.
1 Like
Just to be clear, and not argumentively, I never said anything in my responses about sitters abusing homeowner generosity. I only said if THS seems to side more with homeowners – and not seeing data I’m not convinced that’s the case – it may simply be that homeowners are more likely to file a dispute if something went amiss, so it is more likely to be looked at. If sitters filed more disputes, maybe homeowners woud be more likely to face some consequences. But as it is, sitters don’t generally even warn other sitters in reviews, let alone by contacted THS and officially starting a dispute.
Here’s how I look at it: THS is neither my boss or my mom whether I’m in a homeowner role or a sitter role. They aren’t a service providing only the best sitters or only the best homes. Despite background checks they aren’t checking the truth of homeowner listing statements or sitter profiles. All the vetting has to be done by the individuals on both sides of the equation. If problems come up once a sit has started, then both parties need to communicate about it directly. If the sitter or the homeowner feels a need to warn others after the sit is completed, then either party can state it in a review.
5 Likes
That is not a helpful criterium. Reviews of HOs are not primarily for the HO (they are not thank-you notes), they are there to inform future sitters.
Have you never been on a sit where you wished that previous sitters had been candid?
And how do you choose the sits that you apply for? Do you read the reviews to find information?
11 Likes
I agree with all points! I Currently have two bookings with last minute welcome guide mentioning restrictions because of dog anxiety and puppy pads. Never would have accepted this. Both instances i met the HOs before the sit.
We used to be able to block our calendar out!
2 Likes
I do not seem to be able to modify my calendar anymore 
I agree with you. It’s so hard in a review to say everything… maybe it would be best if people could message past sitters.
For example, a lot of cats wake you up- should I say the range of wake ups I get? For some people 7:30 is not an issue. I would almost expect it for a catsit.
WiFi is another one I struggle with. If wifi is good on most rooms but you can’t lay in bed and surf…. I wouldn’t mention it in a review but maybe to a friend.
Always so hard to know!
1 Like