Rover Implements New Rate Caps?
So in my experience with Rover Support, if there is ever an issue regarding a client or pet concerning safety or otherwise, Rover Support is always extremely quick to point out that as sitters, we are 1099 contactors. Here is one of the more recent bullshit answers I received when a client (not their pet...) put my safety in jeopardy and I recommended they be removed or flagged from the Rover platform:
"As an independent business owner, occasionally you'll encounter a client who isn’t compatible. When that happens, we recommend politely declining the request--we never want you to book a service that you’re uncomfortable with. I understand that this interaction fell short of expectations, and we hope the next client who contacts you is a better fit."
With that in mind, I found out yesterday that they have now placed a cap on our fees. I live in a high income area and intentionally set my rates high in order to attract a certain level of clientele. Yesterday I went to adjust my rates and found that you cannot set your house sitting rate above $150 per night. Here is what support said in response:
"My name is Shakeidra with Rover Support. Yes, there is a maximum amount of $150 now."
So regardless of anyone's opinion regarding my rates, I do not think rate caps are fair for sitters at all. Rover takes a HUGE cut from us and this practice of capping rates is extremely distasteful. Each year that passes, we seem to get less and less support from Rover and more red tape gets applied.
another option you have is to increase your additional dog fee to make up the difference in what you would like to actually charge. and/or not lower your 10days or more fee. If clients are willing to pay in your area, you are cutting yourself short. You are still providing the same quality care.
capping the rate is ludicrous. In a state, such as CA, where cost of living is sky high, it only makes sense to charge enough to be able to make money as a sitter. Who can work for $150/day in CA and keep a roof over their head?
Which year was this implemented? It obviously hasn't been adjusted for inflation.