Phew! Thank you!
I’ve just seen a new listing not far from me. Headline includes ‘at the exclusive X Lakes’ (name removed by me). It’s a nice enough new build development but nothing special or exclusive about it, and it abuts a very run-down small town.
Too much hype, the sitters may be disappointed. It’s bog standard housing in a pretty but bog standard housing estate.
Maths isn’t my strong point but I thought I noticed this too. The listing is like a riddle, and you eventually work out you’re going to be stuck at the house most of the time, waiting for the next part of the dogs schedule.
I know there’s a variety of opinions on this this, but to me, this is the kind of listing which highlights the damaging potential for exploitation on THS. If someone has nowhere to stay and they need to take a sit (lets be honest about the range of economic positions people are in) they can end up giving a substantial amount of their time / labour which in a fair world would be paid.
The “if you don’t want to do it, don’t” line could be argued, but I see it as similar to if you don’t want to work and underpaid job then don’t! When really the underpaid job shouldn’t exist in the first place.
2 Likes
This isn’t a job, sitting is voluntary, the listing is disclosing everything up front . I wouldn’t apply for it but I see no problem with it being advertised . The responsibilities are clearly listed (and do not break any of the THS T&Cs ) so any sitter that applies knows full well upfront what they are getting in to.
6 Likes
There are actual crimes and tragedies in the world. Voluntary pet sitting is not one of them.
The problem with victim thinking like this: Not recognizing one’s agency traps you in whatever the world happens to dish out. A self-inflicted trap.
2 Likes
I’m aware, I research human rights and war as part of my job.
I’ve discussed the dynamic with my therapist and friends, who have been shocked at how much is it unpaid and I just think it’s an interesting conversation.
1 Like
***[quote=“Silversitters, post:24, topic:57343, full:true”]
This isn’t a job, sitting is voluntary, the listing is disclosing everything up front . I wouldn’t apply for it but I see no problem with it being advertised as the responsibilities are clearly listed so any sitter that applies knows full well upfront what they are getting in to.
[/quote]
I respectfully disagree: This ad is by no means the worst I’ve seen in terms of entitlement (owners expecting unpaid work from sitters).
But allowing posts that far exceed the fair trade standard encourages other owners to think that this is okay or even the standard. This would especially be true for new owners. What is next, acknowledging that there are interior cameras that are periodically active? Acknowledging that the neighbors or family members will be dropping by? Acknowledging that an adult child will be sleeping on the property, etc? We are on a slippery slope: the exception may become the rule. For brand new sitters trying to build a resume such circumstances may be “acceptable” because they “need” the sit. Same with someone who is in a precarius financial situation. There are minimum wage laws to protect against exploitation in employment. On TH we just have the TH policies and I believe that TH needs to do more to make those policies clear to all, especially to new H.O. and new sitters.
4 Likes
THS isn’t aimed at solving homelessness or poverty. It’s actually just a platform where people can match (or not).
People who are desperate financially or housing wise actually shouldn’t be sitting for free — there are pet sitting jobs that pay, that don’t require traveling or associated costs. When someone travels via THS, that’s a voluntary lifestyle choice.
8 Likes
So maybe TH should only accept sitters like yourself then?
Again, that would involve paternalism that’s not reasonable to expect from THS.
Personally, I grew up without money and figured out how to earn, save and invest it by reading via the library, starting young — I’m old enough to have not grown up with the internet.
Common sense wise, I knew that there were plenty of choices I couldn’t afford then, including travel. I knew that if I wanted them, I’d have to wait till I was in better financial shape.
I would think it would be an easier choice if one is financially unstable to be a paid carer for pets and/ or don’t require travel expenses, as Maggie8k says. Of course one doesn’t have to choose «easy» or «paid», it is as you say voluntary.
What I find challenging - apart from the «easy» and «paid»-parts, is that if one does THS-petsitting without being financially stable, the risk of putting oneself in situations where one is exploited and taken advantage of will rise dramatically. As we have seen examples of in forum. Because one doesn’t really have the freedom to simply say no, to withdraw or put up boundaries in challenging situations. And those situations can also lead to unexpected costs with unfortunate timing. To be a little bit brutal - if you have F… u… - money, you are able to put up boundaries and able to not apply, withdraw or give 24 hours notice and leave a sit in breach of terms. If you don’t you can’t.
I do think it is too easy to say «you chose it», as one might exactly not be in the position to choose, and that is why it happened in the first place. It is a fact, probably not well-known, that if you have few resources you are more likely to take short-term decisions. Which is what one has to, to get by. Decisions that are long term beneficial is a luxury that require resources. Also in petsitting.
I don’t think it should be a requirement to have financial stability to be a member. But it is nevertheless a great asset in petsitting. I do think it is a factor that THS should take into account Re the importance of keeping people accountable to the terms of THS, as the plattform can be used to exploit people with few resources. That is also part of the Sustainability-work.
4 Likes
I completely agree but I also think some listings don’t belong on this platform and should be paid jobs. I don’t mean the one in the OP, which may be acceptable for some sitters. After all, it’s just one dog. Quite a different thing is the owner but that’s true for a lot of listings, it’s just a matter of choosing a good match.
1 Like
Yes, many of us have said likewise. That’s different from someone expecting THS to address homelessness and poverty, though, which seems obvious.
I read about this ages ago, because of a strong interest in human psych since childhood. While this might be the case with some individuals, it’s also not THS’s job to solve for.
The reality is, unless people develop better judgment, they’ll typically suffer the consequences. And the ability to delay gratification can be a defining characteristic in life, not just sitting.
There’s a lot to be gained by observing others and paying attention to their mistakes. Personally, I saw many bad examples among adults when I was a kid and decided to avoid living as they did, which helped me build the life I have.
Ultimately, life is unfair and relying on businesses to correct that will tend to lead to disappointment, because that’s not their focus. Even social agencies and such — which exist to combat homelessness and poverty — can’t manage much.
When I said nowhere to stay, I was referring to full time sitters who rely on taking sits.
Here’s two articles on the topic
The Guardian - 21 Nov 22 ‘I’m a homeless guy looking after a palace!’
The Telegraph - ‘We chose to become ‘homeless’ after living in a 10-bedroom Oxford mansion’
Edited to remove links
Are you implying people run into hard financial situations because they can’t ‘delay gratification’?
There are full-time nomads, who choose to sit out of choice. They’re house-free out of choice and can afford alternatives to terrible sits. That’s separate from people who are houseless because they can’t afford places to stay and who might choose to sit because of that lack.
The key difference is choice vs. no choice. For people without choice, yes, they can end up at the mercy of others, and that’s true whether or not they’re sitting.
It’s best to not muddle the two — hosts often do. And exploitative people, whether hosting or otherwise, will always be looking to exploit people.
The best way to not be exploited is to figure out how to improve your standard of living. It is not to look to THS or other businesses to solve that for individuals. It is hard to improve a standard of living by doing free labor of any sort, whether sitting or otherwise and trying to travel at the same time.
Conflating things doesn’t help anyone, especially if they’re in bad financial situations or they’re lacking housing.
1 Like
If they’re traveling and working for free, yes, that’s probably the case, because it’s hard to earn a steady living that way when you’re in a jam as described — financially precarious.
If you have a plan that allows someone to work for free and travel that leads to a stable financial picture, it would be helpful to share with folks you’re worried about.
1 Like
There’s always going to be over the top postings; and I sincerely hope they either get pushback from sitters before they find a suitable one. Or struggle to get applicants.
This summer I saw a listing in a popular city, requesting 2 videos a day incl. one of the apartment. Sounded like policing & micro-managing to me.
I sent a message to the HO (with no intention to do the sit), who some time later reached out whether I was actually available to do the sit. I guess she had difficulty filling the sit if she’s that suspicious of sitters.
1 Like
To be perfectly honest, it doesn’t offend me at all, it just sounds like they are trying to be cute and they’ve put in a lot of effort to be detailed in their description but we all have different Standards of what appeals to us 
1 Like