I've been working as a Architectural Consultant but I am required to work 40 hrs a week at the office. Since I started have been getting paid late. Today makes it 10 days late. I want to know is this the industry's standard to receive a check late. Please let me know if this is fair or should I just stop working until I get paid. Getting very frustrated!!!
Nope, not an industry standard, just a shitty/sketchy situation. You should withhold services until you're paid in full.
Jan 10, 14 9:54 am ·
·
It happens. But hardly indurstry standard. It's up to you to determine how much you'll put up with it but keep in mind that you can't squeze blood from a stone so choose your battles wisefully.
Miles is right. The IRS would probably not be amused and neither would your state's labor department. Bottom line is that this situation should raise red flags about whether you want to continue the relationship.
Exactly what everyone else has said. Sketchy/illegal situation to call you contract but require you to be onsite. And late payment is a major, major red flag.
You should have a talk w your "client" sometimes it helps to hit their bill payment cycle on the right day, and also know if they pay their bills once, twice or 4 times a month. I find including a SASE with your invoice also helps w prompt payment. Talk to them about paying w a credit card (PayPal) or do a payment plan if they are low on funds.
its a tough situation, i assume you are doing this because you've been unable to find a traditional position. It is better to be working than not, but no point in working for free either. Has the "employer" said anything to you? If not, a sit down meeting would be the first order of business.
I'd probably keep working and keep looking for something else at the same time. When you find permanent employment give the IRS a call.
we don't really have enough info to say that you should be a traditional employee or if IC is legal in this case, but small shops love to skirt this particular law
"Misclassifying worker status. Sometimes employers incorrectly treat employees as independent contractors to avoid paying employment taxes. Generally if the payer has the right to control what work will be done and how it will be done, the worker is an employee. Employers who misclassify employees as independent contractors (and are not eligible for relief under Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978) will be liable for the employment taxes on wages paid to the misclassified worker and subject to penalties."
BTW, I was 1099 at one office for 2 years and 10 months - I owe IRS 10k now
^ The OP is not going to go to prison over something like this. The point is simply that the combination of a dubious legal classification AND not getting paid doesn't bode well. Somethings not on the up and up. "Jobs" like this you don't need.
Generally if the payer has the right to control what work will be done and how it will be done, the worker is an employee.
This is the heart of the distinction. If the employer hired you to work on one specific project only, with an agreed-upon set completion date, but they require that you work on it during their regular office hours, you're likely 1099. If they just require you to show up and then decide what you're going to work on that day, or hand you work based on whatever needs to be done that day, you're an employee.
And yeah, OP you won't end up in jail, as long as you pay the self-employment quarterly taxes required. But in that case the employer needs to be paying you twice what they pay an employee hourly for the same work to cover your tax costs.
Very few people end up in jail for non-payment of taxes. Most just have wages garnished and property they own seized or leined. And of course most of them make very little money to begin with.
by the way, it's not anob's fault he was hired by a moron with no integrity. the employer made the decision to create this environment; the crime is on them and them alone (until anob cheats on his taxes). let's try to slow down the conservative 'blame the poor people' crap.
One thing to also take into consideration is if your a Licensed Architect. If you are not licensed you are to be working under the direct supervision of a Licensed Architect. There are some states which say if your not licensed they can not hire you as a consultant. They must take you on as and employee and they must pay overtime for work exceeding 40 hours per week, they are also required to pay and tax out taxes from your check. If in question call the IRS hotline and get some advice or talk to a tax attorney or talk to an accountant and see if they can send you in the right direction. An accountant might be your best source cause if your working as a consultant most likely your going to end up using and account to sort all your tax stuff at the end of the year so you don't end up owing thousands of dollars of back taxes...and you become their client.
I was told not to snitch on my former employer for the 2 years 10 months I worked 1099 with them. "you wanna leave architetcure? then go ahead and snitch"
Quit, NOW! Get a check, cash check, and QUIT. Badmouth this fucker here, and I'll be sure to send an email, in my real name, in which I will shame them to heaven on high. Do it, don't fucking weasel out.
Look, the boss man is 10 days late. That's not that weird for small biz bill payment. Sinks when you're on the receiving end, but it is reality. OP needs to have a talk w them to find out why, then report back. All this talking about legal penalties and labor law violation is silly.
"by the way, it's not anob's fault he was hired by a moron with no integrity. the employer made the decision to create this environment; the crime is on them and them alone (until anob cheats on his taxes). let's try to slow down the conservative 'blame the poor people' crap."
So far Anob has written almost nothing about his situation, so you don't have enough facts to back up these sorts of histrionic statements.
What possible situation would occur, in your mind, in which you'd allow someone not to pay your salary for ten days? Can I use that excuse for my mortgage company, my car insurance? If Anob lets this happen once, it will happen twice, thrice, etc, etc, etc...I don't care what this idiot gives for an excuse, they got the labor, Anob gets money for labor.
It comes gown to anon figuring out whether the boss is acting in good faith or not. I mean, it's one thing if a small business owner comes to you *before* payday and says look , I'm expecting a check to come in but if it doesn't I'm going to be short for payroll, give me a sense of exactly how much you absolutely need to pay the bills and feed yourself so if I have to scrape it together I can, and by the way if I can't make full payroll I totally expect you to not show up until I *can*pay, I'm embarrassed and so so sorry about this etc etc.
It's another story if s/he "forgets" that it's payday then heads off for a week in Miami meaning sorry-not-sorry can't pay you till I get back etc etc
The possibility that anob is working as an employee but getting paid as a contractor makes suspect the boss is more like the latter.
I'm NOT speculating. I'm saying irrespective of "reason" no excuse, quit. Also, I'm asking YOU, SITC, to speculate on a "what if it happened to you". So nice try.
a) he was working as a consultant. that was given.
b) his schedule and location for work was set by his employer. given.
c) his paycheck came late. given
c.1) it's implied that there was a set date that his paycheck should have arrived.
d) anob said "i don't think I can work for someone that has any integrity." - that implies a lack of integrity on the part of the boss too doesn't it?
it's given in his statement that his employer established an agreement and then broke that agreement. it's the employer's responsibility to uphold their end of that agreement. i realize shit happens, but if this was a simple mistake and the boss handled it well, i really don't think anob would have posted here.
also, it's not histrionic. it's me being pissed off at neo-cons who decided aspiring to failure is preferable to their conservative predecessor's belief in personal responsibility. histrionic is typically seeking attention for the sake of attention. i don't know if you or anob's boss are neo-cons. that's speculation. it just sounds like you seem partial towards defending failure as the preferable course. the angry tone to my post originates from the actions of those who are neo-cons and tea partiers; your association is incidental because of the similarity to their 'principles' and your statement. 'transference' is probably closer than 'histrionic.'
not paying your employees is not industry standard. more importantly, it should not become industry standard. when it happens, other people should say 'hey, that's not right' instead of 'well, we don't really know what happened.'
i grant that it is possible anob's boss is not a moron. i don't know. however, the important part there is that it is still not anob's fault. it had been hinted at that anob might get in trouble for his role in this scenario, which i think is incorrect. it is the employer's responsibility to see to it they are employing anob in a manner consistent with current labor laws. if he is a regular employee hired as a contractor, that is not consistent with current labor laws. it's not anob's fault if that happened, and anob will not be held responsible. if someone is held responsible, it will be the employer. there is no reason, given what has been written, for you to suggest that anob did anything wrong, or that his employers did the right thing by not paying him an agreed upon amount at an agreed upon time.
tl;dr yes, i have enough information from anob's posts to make that statment.
"...when it happens, other people should say 'hey, that's not right' instead of 'well, we don't really know what happened..."
Really goes to the heart of what I'm saying, plus you've outlined a false choice.
At least one other option would be actually helping a guy out. This would mean getting more information, quite a bit of listening, and then deciding what can be done.
Using words like "crime" and "moron", and automatically attaching a yet unknown individual to a particular political party jumps the gun.
Part of my other option involves getting the other side of the story. There is always the other side, about which you know nothing so far. Leaping to "hey, that's not right" may sound like the moral high road, but it many cases it's just a reflection of what you want to hear.
But whatever blows your hair back. Miles seems to enjoy it.
sorry if i'm using too strong language for you sneaky. are you saying that you believe it might be ok for this guy's employer/client to not pay him, and you are not a neo-con? or it might be ok for this guy's employer/client to not pay him, and you believe your opinion on that is not influenced by fox news or other right-wing fringe political sources?
it's simply not acceptable to not pay people for the work they've done. the OP was clearly asking if that is industry standard. i was helping by telling him it is not industry standard, and also that he probably doesn't have to worry about going to jail (that was brought up by xenakis earlier in this thread). telling him you don't have enough information, and that not getting paid is sometimes acceptable, does not help him, because not getting paid is not acceptable and it's not normal. most people would know that - especially people who have to work for a living.
the concept that it should be acceptable to work for free so other people can benefit from your labor is not something a normal rational person would believe in. the profit motive is working for your own profit, not somebody else's. there are not very many organizations outside of fox news, the koch brothers, or the neo-cons trying to brain-wash people into believing that sort of thing. the link between economic theory and political views is pretty strong, and i don't see anything wrong with calling it out when the economic theory is that harmful.
if you're dumb enough to fall for right-wing economic policy that takes money away from people working for a living and redistributes it to upper classes, then you should make your bias clear and tell us your a tea partier or some other sort of fringe nut. that bias is valid to any statement you make regarding the economic theory you're supporting.
Other side of the story? I really like that one, I should try using that some time, I'm sure it'll get me far. What I like most about that notion is that it presumes there is a rational explanation, whereby, I, the aggrieved party would feel some empathy, let the person cry on my shoulder, and have me consoling them. Perfect.
This happened to me twice - both times I was under 20, and a bit more, how should I say, forceful. Both times before I even went to architecture school. The second guy gave me all sorts of excuses, all the while, buying expensive box sets of baseball cards, and getting a new cadillac lease. When I finally started showing up to the Macy's carpet department, where he moonlighted as a salesmen, he started taking me seriously, but that might have been because I showed up with some of my bearded biker friends. Even then, he managed to negotiate and trade salary for baseball card collections, hey I needed something, and he needed his knees.
Point is this; no amount of listening, no amount of empathy, none, will ever change a person who does this kind of thing; they are ethically flexible and that kind of person will only respond to what's in their best interest. For this guy, it was that I would continue to show up at Macy's, and make it difficult for him to work.
so saint, you really believe something happened that would justify anob's employer/client not taking responsibility for themselves and the decisions they made? you really think it's ok to not pay architects if you don't want to pay them after they've done the job they've agreed to?
it's probably not as complicated as you seem to think.
We all must not accept this type of stuff - no more working for free and no more allowing people to not pay us and take take advantage of us. I recently did some work for someone(floor plans(Demo Plans) for a nail shop in Benicia Ca.) she said they would pay - after I sent her the PDFs, the check never came and she had the audacity to ask that i do the CDs. I told her I would never work for her again.
Also I snitched on the employer that had me work 1099 for 3 years when I should have been W2 - I can't wait tofor the IRS hearing on this one - most of their clients are law offices and Mother Jones.
Every one if us who work in a firm use 'consultants' and it's almost universal for consultant agreements to include a "pay when paid" clause - meaning the consultant is paid only when the client pays the Architect.
I have no clue what Anob's actual agreement is with his 'employer' -- but neither does anybody else here. Since Anob describes his role as 'an Architectural Consultant' it's very likely his agreement includes a 'pay when paid' clause.
Now, having said that, I'm not defending the firm that has employed Anob - this sounds to me like a W2 situation - not a 1099. But Anob and the firm agreed to something and it would not surprised me if the firm is operating according to the agreed upon terms.
Guys - always read the fine print and don't move forward if you don't accept - or understand - the terms and conditions.
anob wasn't paid because his employer/client decided he wasn't worth paying. what sort of person believes anob isn't worth paying? that's seriously fucked up. architects are worth paying.
saint, stone is speculating that there is a clause in the contract that directly contradicts the stated fact that anob was supposed to be paid 10 days ago. do you support that sort of speculation now? why are you trying to defend people who say architects aren't worth paying?
Getting paid LATE!!
Good Morning everyone, Need some help
I've been working as a Architectural Consultant but I am required to work 40 hrs a week at the office. Since I started have been getting paid late. Today makes it 10 days late. I want to know is this the industry's standard to receive a check late. Please let me know if this is fair or should I just stop working until I get paid. Getting very frustrated!!!
Nope, not an industry standard, just a shitty/sketchy situation. You should withhold services until you're paid in full.
It happens. But hardly indurstry standard. It's up to you to determine how much you'll put up with it but keep in mind that you can't squeze blood from a stone so choose your battles wisefully.
Also full time on site is not consulting. Employer is required to put you on the books with associated benefits.
Miles is right. The IRS would probably not be amused and neither would your state's labor department. Bottom line is that this situation should raise red flags about whether you want to continue the relationship.
Let me further check into the IRS to obtain leverage. And i don't think I can work for someone that has any integrity. Thank you so much guys.
Exactly what everyone else has said. Sketchy/illegal situation to call you contract but require you to be onsite. And late payment is a major, major red flag.
Full-time consultants work on-site regularly at many firms. Parties agree on the duration.
What's the IRS infraction?
its a tough situation, i assume you are doing this because you've been unable to find a traditional position. It is better to be working than not, but no point in working for free either. Has the "employer" said anything to you? If not, a sit down meeting would be the first order of business.
I'd probably keep working and keep looking for something else at the same time. When you find permanent employment give the IRS a call.
we don't really have enough info to say that you should be a traditional employee or if IC is legal in this case, but small shops love to skirt this particular law
"Misclassifying worker status. Sometimes employers incorrectly treat employees as independent contractors to avoid paying employment taxes. Generally if the payer has the right to control what work will be done and how it will be done, the worker is an employee. Employers who misclassify employees as independent contractors (and are not eligible for relief under Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978) will be liable for the employment taxes on wages paid to the misclassified worker and subject to penalties."
BTW, I was 1099 at one office for 2 years and 10 months - I owe IRS 10k now
Whats worse - unemployment or Federal prison? take your pick -
^ The OP is not going to go to prison over something like this. The point is simply that the combination of a dubious legal classification AND not getting paid doesn't bode well. Somethings not on the up and up. "Jobs" like this you don't need.
Generally if the payer has the right to control what work will be done and how it will be done, the worker is an employee.
This is the heart of the distinction. If the employer hired you to work on one specific project only, with an agreed-upon set completion date, but they require that you work on it during their regular office hours, you're likely 1099. If they just require you to show up and then decide what you're going to work on that day, or hand you work based on whatever needs to be done that day, you're an employee.
And yeah, OP you won't end up in jail, as long as you pay the self-employment quarterly taxes required. But in that case the employer needs to be paying you twice what they pay an employee hourly for the same work to cover your tax costs.
Donna
So true - the people I use to work 1099 for offered me $24/hr 1099 to come back - they balked when I asked for $30/hr -
Very few people end up in jail for non-payment of taxes. Most just have wages garnished and property they own seized or leined. And of course most of them make very little money to begin with.
also,
http://www.sba.gov/content/hire-contractor-or-employee
by the way, it's not anob's fault he was hired by a moron with no integrity. the employer made the decision to create this environment; the crime is on them and them alone (until anob cheats on his taxes). let's try to slow down the conservative 'blame the poor people' crap.
Thank you everyone for all this information.
One thing to also take into consideration is if your a Licensed Architect. If you are not licensed you are to be working under the direct supervision of a Licensed Architect. There are some states which say if your not licensed they can not hire you as a consultant. They must take you on as and employee and they must pay overtime for work exceeding 40 hours per week, they are also required to pay and tax out taxes from your check. If in question call the IRS hotline and get some advice or talk to a tax attorney or talk to an accountant and see if they can send you in the right direction. An accountant might be your best source cause if your working as a consultant most likely your going to end up using and account to sort all your tax stuff at the end of the year so you don't end up owing thousands of dollars of back taxes...and you become their client.
I was told not to snitch on my former employer for the 2 years 10 months I worked 1099 with them. "you wanna leave architetcure? then go ahead and snitch"
who said to not snitch? your state labor board? the irs? get out of california. the world is too small over there.
A co-worker - my Job Captain
Old Chinese proverb: No tickee, no shirtee.
Quit, NOW! Get a check, cash check, and QUIT. Badmouth this fucker here, and I'll be sure to send an email, in my real name, in which I will shame them to heaven on high. Do it, don't fucking weasel out.
"by the way, it's not anob's fault he was hired by a moron with no integrity. the employer made the decision to create this environment; the crime is on them and them alone (until anob cheats on his taxes). let's try to slow down the conservative 'blame the poor people' crap."
So far Anob has written almost nothing about his situation, so you don't have enough facts to back up these sorts of histrionic statements.
What possible situation would occur, in your mind, in which you'd allow someone not to pay your salary for ten days? Can I use that excuse for my mortgage company, my car insurance? If Anob lets this happen once, it will happen twice, thrice, etc, etc, etc...I don't care what this idiot gives for an excuse, they got the labor, Anob gets money for labor.
Quit before you exceed the limit of small claims court. In NY it's $3,000. Should be $50k, but lawyers would lose money. Can't have that.
"What possible situation would occur, in your mind..."
No thanks -- I'm the one not speculating.
It's another story if s/he "forgets" that it's payday then heads off for a week in Miami meaning sorry-not-sorry can't pay you till I get back etc etc
The possibility that anob is working as an employee but getting paid as a contractor makes suspect the boss is more like the latter.
how is that speculation?
a) he was working as a consultant. that was given.
b) his schedule and location for work was set by his employer. given.
c) his paycheck came late. given
c.1) it's implied that there was a set date that his paycheck should have arrived.
d) anob said "i don't think I can work for someone that has any integrity." - that implies a lack of integrity on the part of the boss too doesn't it?
it's given in his statement that his employer established an agreement and then broke that agreement. it's the employer's responsibility to uphold their end of that agreement. i realize shit happens, but if this was a simple mistake and the boss handled it well, i really don't think anob would have posted here.
also, it's not histrionic. it's me being pissed off at neo-cons who decided aspiring to failure is preferable to their conservative predecessor's belief in personal responsibility. histrionic is typically seeking attention for the sake of attention. i don't know if you or anob's boss are neo-cons. that's speculation. it just sounds like you seem partial towards defending failure as the preferable course. the angry tone to my post originates from the actions of those who are neo-cons and tea partiers; your association is incidental because of the similarity to their 'principles' and your statement. 'transference' is probably closer than 'histrionic.'
not paying your employees is not industry standard. more importantly, it should not become industry standard. when it happens, other people should say 'hey, that's not right' instead of 'well, we don't really know what happened.'
i grant that it is possible anob's boss is not a moron. i don't know. however, the important part there is that it is still not anob's fault. it had been hinted at that anob might get in trouble for his role in this scenario, which i think is incorrect. it is the employer's responsibility to see to it they are employing anob in a manner consistent with current labor laws. if he is a regular employee hired as a contractor, that is not consistent with current labor laws. it's not anob's fault if that happened, and anob will not be held responsible. if someone is held responsible, it will be the employer. there is no reason, given what has been written, for you to suggest that anob did anything wrong, or that his employers did the right thing by not paying him an agreed upon amount at an agreed upon time.
tl;dr yes, i have enough information from anob's posts to make that statment.
Zing!
"...when it happens, other people should say 'hey, that's not right' instead of 'well, we don't really know what happened..."
Really goes to the heart of what I'm saying, plus you've outlined a false choice.
At least one other option would be actually helping a guy out. This would mean getting more information, quite a bit of listening, and then deciding what can be done.
Using words like "crime" and "moron", and automatically attaching a yet unknown individual to a particular political party jumps the gun.
Part of my other option involves getting the other side of the story. There is always the other side, about which you know nothing so far. Leaping to "hey, that's not right" may sound like the moral high road, but it many cases it's just a reflection of what you want to hear.
But whatever blows your hair back. Miles seems to enjoy it.
You bet!
Oh, yeah -- you're quite the "bystander", Miles.....
;-)
sorry if i'm using too strong language for you sneaky. are you saying that you believe it might be ok for this guy's employer/client to not pay him, and you are not a neo-con? or it might be ok for this guy's employer/client to not pay him, and you believe your opinion on that is not influenced by fox news or other right-wing fringe political sources?
it's simply not acceptable to not pay people for the work they've done. the OP was clearly asking if that is industry standard. i was helping by telling him it is not industry standard, and also that he probably doesn't have to worry about going to jail (that was brought up by xenakis earlier in this thread). telling him you don't have enough information, and that not getting paid is sometimes acceptable, does not help him, because not getting paid is not acceptable and it's not normal. most people would know that - especially people who have to work for a living.
the concept that it should be acceptable to work for free so other people can benefit from your labor is not something a normal rational person would believe in. the profit motive is working for your own profit, not somebody else's. there are not very many organizations outside of fox news, the koch brothers, or the neo-cons trying to brain-wash people into believing that sort of thing. the link between economic theory and political views is pretty strong, and i don't see anything wrong with calling it out when the economic theory is that harmful.
if you're dumb enough to fall for right-wing economic policy that takes money away from people working for a living and redistributes it to upper classes, then you should make your bias clear and tell us your a tea partier or some other sort of fringe nut. that bias is valid to any statement you make regarding the economic theory you're supporting.
You're still attempting connections where none exist, but it sounds like you're convinced of your approach. Enjoy.
Hi Anob!
Big firm? Little firm?
"industry standard"? I suppose not . . .
common as fuck? yup.
Other side of the story? I really like that one, I should try using that some time, I'm sure it'll get me far. What I like most about that notion is that it presumes there is a rational explanation, whereby, I, the aggrieved party would feel some empathy, let the person cry on my shoulder, and have me consoling them. Perfect.
This happened to me twice - both times I was under 20, and a bit more, how should I say, forceful. Both times before I even went to architecture school. The second guy gave me all sorts of excuses, all the while, buying expensive box sets of baseball cards, and getting a new cadillac lease. When I finally started showing up to the Macy's carpet department, where he moonlighted as a salesmen, he started taking me seriously, but that might have been because I showed up with some of my bearded biker friends. Even then, he managed to negotiate and trade salary for baseball card collections, hey I needed something, and he needed his knees.
Point is this; no amount of listening, no amount of empathy, none, will ever change a person who does this kind of thing; they are ethically flexible and that kind of person will only respond to what's in their best interest. For this guy, it was that I would continue to show up at Macy's, and make it difficult for him to work.
so saint, you really believe something happened that would justify anob's employer/client not taking responsibility for themselves and the decisions they made? you really think it's ok to not pay architects if you don't want to pay them after they've done the job they've agreed to?
it's probably not as complicated as you seem to think.
We all must not accept this type of stuff - no more working for free and no more allowing people to not pay us and take take advantage of us. I recently did some work for someone(floor plans(Demo Plans) for a nail shop in Benicia Ca.) she said they would pay - after I sent her the PDFs, the check never came and she had the audacity to ask that i do the CDs. I told her I would never work for her again.
Also I snitched on the employer that had me work 1099 for 3 years when I should have been W2 - I can't wait tofor the IRS hearing on this one - most of their clients are law offices and Mother Jones.
the reason for inequality is because we allow it.
The capitalist value system is a race to the bottom.
Come on folks - lighten up a bit.
Every one if us who work in a firm use 'consultants' and it's almost universal for consultant agreements to include a "pay when paid" clause - meaning the consultant is paid only when the client pays the Architect.
I have no clue what Anob's actual agreement is with his 'employer' -- but neither does anybody else here. Since Anob describes his role as 'an Architectural Consultant' it's very likely his agreement includes a 'pay when paid' clause.
Now, having said that, I'm not defending the firm that has employed Anob - this sounds to me like a W2 situation - not a 1099. But Anob and the firm agreed to something and it would not surprised me if the firm is operating according to the agreed upon terms.
Guys - always read the fine print and don't move forward if you don't accept - or understand - the terms and conditions.
"I'd probably keep working and keep looking for something else at the same time. When you find permanent employment give the IRS a call."
Yeah right, do that and be unemployed for a while. Its a small world and snitches are treated as crap.
Stone is clearly an instrument of the Tea Party.
anob wasn't paid because his employer/client decided he wasn't worth paying. what sort of person believes anob isn't worth paying? that's seriously fucked up. architects are worth paying.
saint, stone is speculating that there is a clause in the contract that directly contradicts the stated fact that anob was supposed to be paid 10 days ago. do you support that sort of speculation now? why are you trying to defend people who say architects aren't worth paying?
stone believes it's ok to be unfair to people -
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.