OT: A rant about the USP – a “non-profit” organization [Bioanalytics]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-07-04 14:05 (1838 d 14:56 ago) – Posting: # 20374
Views: 4,736

I agree this is a catastrophic example of very bad planning.

In perspective:
I heard of a consultant somewhere who was asked to do a lot of work by a world-wide reputed organization and when he sent an invoice he was given the finger and told that consultants generally were free to say yes or no to work or to task orders, so if no task order was offered then he should not expect that the request for work would be accompanied by one and hence all work he would decide to undertake would be a case of volunteering. Apparently noone in said organization thought it inappropirate to ask for work from consultants without the ability to issue a task order.
The consultant had to write this off as a loss and learned a tough lesson: Reputed organizations can and will ask for work they can not or will not pay for and they will be happy to royally screw anyone dumb enough to proceed with delivery of work in good faith with the expectation of compensation.

I will not, of course, in any way insinuate or suggest or hint, that the world-wide reputed organization alluded to above is, or is affiliated with or identifiable as, USP and/or PQM.

Re. the actual case you are in, Hötzi:
My suggestion is to make known to USAID what is going on with the tax payer money, especially if you are now without a task order and out of pocket in good faith.
USP can easily hide behind the nonprofit excuses: The profits at USP technically have little to do with the resources received from the USAID grant which is what PQM use for the activities undertaken by consultants. The nonprofit aspect is irrelevant. What isn't irrelevant is if you are being screwed ten times over by them while they are spending US taxpayer money to haul in fat salaries and in the process creating very little activity for the grant.

Pass or fail!

Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
23,101 posts in 4,857 threads, 1,644 registered users;
78 visitors (0 registered, 78 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:01 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

One can show the following: given any rule, however “fundamental”
or “necessary” for science, there are always circumstances
when it is advisable not only to ignore the rule,
but to adopt its opposite.    Paul Feyerabend

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz