

Ask HN: The Ethics of Quid Pro Quo - chrsstrm

Discussions among freelancers and contractors often end up being focused on collecting payments from clients and the methods used. Your typical arrangement for best results is to require payment prior to releasing your work on the back end, ensuring that you don't give away your leverage in the payment process. In this example, "this for that" is perfectly acceptable and often expected from both parties.<p>The "tit for tat" situation becomes interesting when you try and apply this scenario to other related situations. For example, you're a contractor with a year-long contract to deliver a project by meeting periodic goals. Let's say that your client is late with last period's payment - is it ethical to drag your feet in project participation until you are paid? Same give and take, but here you've given more than you've taken, creating and imbalance. Is it ethical to stall your progress until this balance is restored? Should balance exist throughout the life of the project, or is the end all that matters? In this situation your client may see your non-participation as hostile and detrimental to the project, causing bad blood rather than righting the imbalance. It seems like tit for tat is acceptable when building trust or for one-off scenarios, but frowned upon in longer term or ongoing situations.<p>So the big question; is quid pro quo always ethical and to what extent should or could it be used?
======
ggchappell
> Let's say that your client is late with last period's payment - is it
> ethical to drag your feet in project participation until you are paid?

I'm a bit baffled as to why anyone would think it isn't ethical. Suppose I go
to a store and say, "I'd like a Coke", and they say, "That will be $1", and I
say "Okay", but then I don't give them the dollar. Is it ethical for them to
withhold the Coke? Of course it is. In the case you mention, the situation is
even clearer, since you have a signed commitment to pay.

> ... is quid pro quo always ethical and _to what extent should or could it be
> used?_

That second part is a very different thing. You are trying to run a successful
business, not just do whatever ethics allows. And that may mean giving
customers some slack on occasion. But are you _required_ to? Of course not.

> Discussions among freelancers and contractors often end up being focused on
> collecting payments from clients and the methods used.

Indeed. But such discussions are largely not about ethics.

------
noptic
That us one of the reasons you should ALWAYS set milestones. Whnever you reach
a milestone the client should give you feeddback and pay you a portion of the
total cost.

If you have not been payed for the last milestone, and a reasonable time has
passed, you should remind the client to pay you.

If the client does not pay stop working until he does. If you do not reach the
milestones in time, you do not get payed.

If the project is headed in the wrong direction you get an early customers
feedback.

Of couse these rules should be agreed on BEFORE you start working on the
project.

------
pasbesoin
Would they pay you on schedule if you were late in delivering?

Are you willing to extend them a loan for the sake of the larger venture?
Because that's essentially what you will be doing. Particular circumstances
will decide whether or not you can/should consider that loan as being secured
to some or any degree.

Will e.g. people die if you don't come through? In that case, you have an
ethical consideration separate from the financial contract.

P.S. Can the situation sully your reputation? What good will is at stake, if
any, that is of value to you aside from the particular contract and
relationship itself?

