@cat.tails from my solo sitter perspective, a pair could use one membership to secure two sit locations that are happening at the same time. We are paying the same membership price. I am already now limited to opportunities to apply to sits with the 5 rule and furthermore, I was limited by sitters who already had a sit and were applying for a second one that had some of the same dates overlapping.
And where exactly would be the difference when sitter couples had two accounts? Would you get more sits?
No, for you nothing would change at all, only the sitters would pay twice.
3 Likes
Pretty much sums it up.
@Pawtastic my membership would then have the same value.
Hi Carla – The reason I keep beating the “cancelation” drum is because this happened to me. Even with a sit in a highly competitve area, I had a sitter cancel for “health reasons” and I realized (months) later they (solo but I don’t want to identify the sitter by gender) actually took another overlapping sit. Or rather, my shorter sit would have completely been inside of the dates of the sit they took. My suspicion is that they applied for both sits around the same time. So their applications were in and they could communicate directly with owners. Shortly (day of) coming to my home to pick up keys and drop off stuff – 4 days before the start of the sit – the sitter informed me that they couldn’t stay in my home due to wheezing and offered to do paid dropins. (I did not accept the offer.) This was a sitter with more than 10 five star reviews. My guess is that I confirmed the sit before the other HO, and the petsitter decided to cancel me to take the other sit. If that was the case, all the update would have done would have been to pause them until they could contact me to ask me to cancel the sit. I would have done so, and then they would have confirmed the other sit. It wouldn’t have helped and it wouldn’t have prevented the behavior. While only HOs can cancel sits, HOs are in the position of needing to cancel at the sitter’s request so they can find another sitter.
Since the new update prevents people from applying for dates that overlap with confirmed sits, it would have prevented them from applying to the second sit after I’d confirmed them, so the update would prevent some cancel hopping, but not necessarily a lot of it, and as THS doesn’t look at “undisputed” cancellations, we don’t know how much the update will prevent.
One can argue that the update is at least “doing something” about a problem – sitters signing up for overlapping sits they can’t cover – but it won’t do much to prevent cancel hopping, which currently is super easy since it leaves no record of any kind if HOs don’t dispute.
2 Likes
But you would not get more sits. What is that value worth then?
@Pawtastic I don’t want to be unable to apply to sits because someone who already has another sit applied before I had a chance.
I’m not looking for more sits.
Nope, it’s completely not possible to even write the host, now.
1 Like
This is very, very problematic for all the reasons our thoughtful sitters have posted. I hope that the moderators (owners?) of THS will take the concerns seriously as this change really impacts us—and owners—mostly negatively. I’d guess that 99% of sitters act in good faith. How about giving us agency in our relationships with hosts, and at least allowing for inquiries (even if it’s an inquiry for a sit that overlaps) for all the aforementioned reasons by our thoughtful sit community.
One example: I had a sit booked that ended one day past another prospective sit that would have gone for another three months. I know the hosts of first sit could have worked with me on end date but since I couldn’t apply/inquire for that second three month sit, a fabulous and much needed opportunity was not possible. Absolutely ridiculous. Very sad. Let’s keep this conversation open.
5 Likes
I think you don’t understand what I am trying to say.
Just a little FYI in case anyone was interested, though someone else may have noted this already. I am currently looking to fill some dates and had no problem applying to sits whose start or end dates were the same as sits already booked, so that function is still intact just fine as they said it would be.
And as for the argument that this scenario is more likely to result in pets being left alone, that is probably true but the circumstances are very different, and I highly doubt anyone who is upset by this new change would want this scenario to be thrown in the mix as well. As someone who sits full time and does this often, I always make sure it is okay with the HO that I leave before they come back; sometimes they proactively say this is okay. I imagine a lot of HOs prefer this actually.
And in many cases, the first sit is completely finished and the HO has arrived home before the next one starts later in the day.
And as many sitters may have experienced, leaving before the HO returns is quite common regardless of whether you are starting a new sit the same day.
So pet sitters leaving the day a sit ends before the HO returns and having the pets be on their own for a mere few hours (provided this is okay with everyone) is very different than someone taking overlapping sits and completely abandoning care of the animals for an entire day or longer. I imagine THS recognizes this difference and realizes barring this practice would have a big effect on HOs finding sitters. My distinguishing of the two scenarios doesn’t mean I agree with the new change however.
I also suspect the bigger impetus for this change is to cut down on people cancelling sits when they find a better one. This won’t solve that problem completely, but if the only way to apply to the more desirable sit is to cancel the one already booked, a lot of people probably don’t want to take that risk. And with the 5 applicant rule, they probably wouldn’t be able to get the sit cancelled in time to get in an application for really desirable locations.
6 Likes
Hello @Marion I am really sorry to read what happened. As sitters, we have had a sit cancelled last minute as well and know how disruptive that can be. Please do not worry about beating the drum for cancellations, it is a super important topic and whilst you are correct this new feature won’t completely stop that, it will be a step towards it as you have said.
The team are aware of the feedback on the forum about cancellations and a few threads are discussing that as well. If anything is announced about how the product team can help with cancellations then we will most definitely share it here on the forum. Thank you for sharing your experience as it is a valuable insight and again I am sorry that happened to you.
“you nothing would change at all”
I think you are asking me what would change for me. And the change would be the other applications would not already have a sit for the same days. It’s just how I would prefer things. We just don’t agree but I value your way of seeing it also.
1 Like
Actually I don’t think this would be the case. The only thing sitter couples would have to do is talk to one home owner to officially shorten the sit during their video call for example. You would never be the wiser that their sits overlap.
It’s a bit more „work“ but doable. That’s why I don’t see any more value for others.
@KC1102
This is not about the tiny minority of irresponsible sitters taking overlapping sits and completely abandoning care of the animals for an entire day or longer.
This is about punishing the vast majority of highly responsible sitters that overlap sits by a day or two to avoid costly accommodation in between sits!
2 Likes
Given the excessively high number of sits that go unfilled completely, it seems counterproductive to put constraints on sitters in this manner.
Moreover, there are no guardrails in place to prevent people from double booking sits by using other platforms or informal arrangements. I have an upcoming sit that ends mid-week, which is super inconvenient for travel.
If a HO posts a date with a single day of overlap but notes in the listing that the dates are flexible, I am fully prohibited from even contacting them to ask about alternative coverage (ie a neighbor, a friend, a paid sitter.) There’s a thanksgiving sit near my home that looks desperate for sitters, and says they have to travel sometime over that week. I’m not booked so of course I can enquire, but they have a week blocked off for maybe 2-3 days of travel max. If there were any conflict in these dates I couldn’t even reach out!
As I’ve said a million times over, this is dreadful UX. Sounds like the back-end is held together with string cheese and duct tape.
The lack of an inquiry/message function is preposterous, especially when people don’t have their travel dates nailed down.
1 Like
We don’t overlap since we are just part-time sitters and only sit a few times each year, but I am still upset about this change and the poor handling of the immediate implementation. Bad sitters are still going to find a way to be irresponsible, but the answer is not to punish everyone. It also seems like this change will make it harder for homeowners to fill many sits. For example, many sits are listed indicating that dates are flexible, but they have to post tentative dates. Now sitters who have a conflict with the tentative dates listed, but could do the “flexible dates” can’t apply or even contact the owners because there is no way for a sitter to contact them without applying. If these sits are last minute, or unpopular for whatever reason, they may go unfilled even though there may have been several sitters who would have applied. This is also the third major change in the platform that has upset many members, but THS refuses to backdown from an announced change. It seems like once THS accepted the venture capital money, they became more focused on growth and not concerned about member satisfaction and retention. Yes, you can voice your opinion all you want, but nothing will be done about it. It seems their huge push to get new members who want to “travel the world for free” or get “free pet-sitting” has contributed to many of the current problems with cancellations, less focus on the pet’s welfare and less focus on treating each other like valued family or friends. It is now like a great health club that had wonderful equipment, great classes and unlimited access and now is only concerned with attracting new members and restricts loyal members to only using the services during non-peak hours unless they pay more. I am frustrated and disappointed with the company, but still love the community.
Edited to keep on topic
9 Likes
I know I’m harping on the date change issue. That’s because it is so, so common. I also want to point out that while sitters try and be flexible about accommodating date changes, we don’t have to be. If homeowners want to shorten a sit and sitters know we won’t be able to apply for replacements (or that it could be days before the dates are officially changed), we do not have to agree. If I’ve accepted a two week sit and the HO decides to change it to 9 days. I can say, no that doesn’t work for me, you’ll have to find another sitter. In that scenario, it is the HO changing the terms of the sit, not the sitter. Sometimes shortened sits make it not worthwhile to even spend the time and money to travel there. But often we could find another sit in the area, now we are much more limited. This change could lead to sitters being less accommodating of the constant date changes.
5 Likes
Yes @Colin I understand that. I don’t agree with that change at all, and as a full time sitter with a partner, I will be negatively impacted as well. I was merely pointing out why they likely didn’t prohibit booking sits with the same start and end dates as other ones the sitter already booked, and that I suspect the bigger reason is to cut down on people cancelling sits for ones they like better.
@Colin I agree. The tiny minority of irresponsible sitters would still have no problem abandoning a sit early and moving on to another sit. That may not necessarily be a THS sit but one with Rover or Nomador etc.
This is definitely not just about pets it is about profit as members are already offering to pay more money for another membership and more opportunities.
Irresponsible sitters will always be irresponsible sitters and will continue to cancel when a better opportunity comes along and that is the issue which needs addressing.
3 Likes