Thus this thread to explore: What happens when money mixes with sits?
It’s not just about sitters offering side services. What if a homeowner runs a business — say, arranging travel — and offers that to a sitter?
What happens when money enters an arrangement built on trust? In many areas of life, boundaries are clear — a physician doesn’t use an appointment to pitch their Etsy shop, and an electrician doesn’t rewire your kitchen while trying to sell you a vacation package. Should the same apply with sits?
Curious what others think:
Where would you draw the line between something that feels genuinely helpful and something that crosses into “too much”?
In what ways do you think cultural expectations make a difference in how people see this?
If THS were to offer guidance, what would you want it to look like to keep the trust strong on both sides?
Where’s the line between a fair exchange, a side hustle, and something that risks the trust this platform is built on?
For sitters, does extra paid work shift the relationship from trust to transaction?
For homeowners, when does hospitality turn into hustle — especially if sitters feel they can’t say no without risking a review?
How do we define boundaries that protect everyone, yet allow space for genuine opportunities? Trust is at the heart of THS, and these grey areas affect both sitters and homeowners.
I’d love to hear people’s thoughts shared in a spirit of curiosity and mutual respect.
I can see why THS allows it — it widens the pool of potential sitters. From the perspective of sitters who need to earn while sitting, even if THS doesn’t allow it for sitting itself, it offers opportunities to stay at the home while earning. Not everyone is privileged to not need to earn or to be able to work remotely.
Of course, depending on what the paid services might be and depending on how soliciting is done, things can get unnecessarily messy, awkward or complicated. And that might strain the sitting partnership and lead to bad reviews or worse.
I doubt THS will do anything to further define such services, because they want to intervene or police as little as possible. As it is, even when serious issues arise with pets and homes, their stance has typically been, work it out among yourselves.
For my part, I know I signed up for minimal support from THS. And even if THS wanted to intervene more, users probably wouldn’t want to pay more for extra staffing, etc. But THS is unlikely to want to do it, period.
Personally, I’m lucky to work out of choice and to telecommute. I don’t accept cash, even when hosts offer it unsolicited. And I wouldn’t want to muddle things by offering any paid services, but that’s also a choice based on my privilege. I don’t want to interfere with such negotiations among others and potentially exclude stuff that works for others. I don’t see that as my business.
That’s my point. It’s just simpler for me as a homeowner to avoid the awkwardness of someone telling me what’s wrong with my home and how they could fix it. I don’t want to have the conversation. If I see it in a listing, I’m out.
Thank you for starting this discussion as a separate thread. I had considered doing it myself but then I didn’t think that I would have the time to monitor it and respond to people.
I was a little shocked to see it mentioned in a previous post and even more shocked when I read that THS permits it. Although their response was that
I, personally, do not like grey areas like this. What is, or is not, considered regular house sitting is very much open to interpretation. On this forum, and in other social media groups, I frequently see the response, “that’s not a pet sitter’s job, that should be paid work”. I’m not going to start a discussion about what I consider to be a house/pet sitter’s job, because I already know that my attitude is very different from many of the current day sitters.
But, because I have been involved in many such discussions, I fear that this approval by THS in regard to paid work could be extremely detrimental to the entire ethos of a free exchange, on which THS is founded.
Setting aside what may, or may not, be considered services worthy of payment it opens up another can of worms in relation to, the legality of working in a tax jurisdiction that is not your own, public liability cover etc
If I were asked by THS for my opinion it would be a definitive NO to soliciting work from home owners or vice versa.
I’m sure I’ll be back with further input depending on how the conversation develops.
Per the other thread: As a homeowner if I see any offer of “additional” paid services for a fee, no matter what those services are and even if they are services I could use, I would decline the sitter because “We aren’t a good match.”
There are hosts who run an AirBnB separate but nearby their home. Helping to run this is business is not part of pet sitting.
I have seen a listing which said that they would not take bookings at the AirBnB for the duration of the sit , unless the sitter wanted to earn some money by helping with some tasks related to the AirBnb .
This seemed to me to be an entirely fair arrangement
.With no expectation that the sitter would do this , but an opportunity for a sitter who is interested in earning some money whilst sitting .
I have also seen listings that said there was paid gardening work available for any sitter interested in earning some money , but again it was clear that it was an optional extra and NOT a prerequisite for the sit .
I don’t think this is a major problem with tons of sitters adding this to their profiles. If THS added this as an official option like “amenities” for homeowners, then it would be a problem. As of now as a homeowner, I see this very rarely on the profiles of sitters who apply and it makes screening them out easy.
Deleted , No longer relevant. I thought it was helpful to share the reply from THS ( I edited and didn’t use names or reply word for word.) But I am not allowed to share that info here.
@Silversitters the problem that I can see with this is that sitters who do express an interest in taking up the offer of paid work will be more likely to be accepted.
If a homeowner is going to do that, they are going to attact the very small subset of sitters who want to do the extra work. The vast majority of sitters if they read that part, are not going to take the extra work. It is going to be clearly illegal for any sitter who can’t work in the country to take the extra work.
I could see such homeowners getting upset that they can’t find sitters! I could see sitters getting upset that these exploitative sits that are probably flouting labor laws exist on the site.
I know there are some people who clearly feel that those sits don’t “belong” on THS and I agree. But I also don’t get enraged that THS seems to permit them.
There are several problems here. When you get paid work into the mix, you will have new sets of challenges regarding
-immigration
-responsibilities as a employer/employee/contractor
-tax etc. (many of these might be intertwined and affect each other)
Some will ofc apply already in some countries, but more will be enhanced, applied or have a greater risk regarding infringement, enforcement and consequences. For instance could a host as an employer be more at risk regarding responsibility to check the immigration status of an employee.
I will avoid all listings/ sits of this nature. I am however worried of how this will impact «normal» THS sits. How will this affect what is expected and whether it will create more muddy waters on an equal change. When some sitters do more and other tasks as paid work, and how it will affect tasks popping up in a WG, last minute or upon arrival, putting some cash on the counter and expect work not agreed pre-confirmation etc.
As a homeowner, I’ve noticed these profiles from time to time and moved on. I also read reviews and have seen some drama. The stories are similar with a sitter complaining about something like “too many plants” so they came to an arrangement with the homeowner about some cash for watering the “excess” plants and they some plants died and accusastions on both sides filed. (Strangely no other sitter reviews refer to this extreme excess.)
This has apparently been permitted. It hasn’t spread. It won’t spread if most sitters don’t do this and homeowners avoid the profiles. As a host, I’ve got a bunch of red flags but I prefer to keep them secret. As a sitter, I probably have a bunch of skills and services I could offer, but I never would offer.
I do think that Trusted Housesitters by offering in-kind services is a money saver for both hosts and sitters. I also know that some sitters manage to earn money through trusted housesitters in interesting ways – renting out their homes while traveling for instance whether it’s a longer term lease or a short term airbnb like situation. I would also imagine that in some long term sits in communiites like a senior community for instance, there is probably some opportunity to help neighbors on daily living tasks like pet care or rides to the supermarket for a little extra money while sitting. It’s only the direct solicitation of the hosts that feels off-putting to me.
