The Ethics of Moonlighting

[mpallamary]

I am going to write an article about the ethics in moonlighting and I am looking for someone to interview. Multiple interviews would be preferable. You can respond in forum or privately.

If you are from a public agency, in the interest of disclosure, I will need you to identify that agency as transparency in the story is imperative.

Thank you.

[mpallamary]

Let's get this started. Who wants to debate Curt Brown? I will stand in for him.

[Jim Frame]

I got a chuckle out of Curt's reference to the heavy cost of business licensing, noting that a city business license can cost $25 per year. When I renewed the business license for my little practice a couple of weeks ago, I paid $434.

[DWoolley]

"I see no objection to part-time practitioners who maintain offices, who do not take advantage of a
public position to solicit business, who pay all costs, and who do not cheat on their full-time employer." Curt Brown

I agree with Curt Brown. In reading the attached article he clearly outlines the rules for part-time workers, public or private. He does not say it shouldn't take place, only to be honest and ethical about how the business is conducted.

A moonlighter is knocking out a lot survey and filing a record of survey, while not violating any of the employers rules, may very well be serving the public. Most honest moonlighters I've known need a little extra cash to get a kid through school or similar. They follow the rules. They would rather not be doing the work. It is a short term fix to a life situation.

If the moonlighter doesn't pay workman's compensation, insurances, issues 1099s or lacks the skills necessary to do the work, well, that is a different situation entirely, according to Curt Brown.

DWoolley

[dedkad]

It seems to me that the bigger threat to a private surveying firm from moonlighting individuals is not the occasional public sector surveyor who does a job here in there, but your own moonlighting employee who has access to your records and client base and could lure those clients away on a permanent basis to either their own private practice or to another firm if they leave yours.

[Dave Karoly, PLS]

I got a chuckle out of Curt's reference to the heavy cost of business licensing, noting that a city business license can cost $25 per year. When I renewed the business license for my little practice a couple of weeks ago, I paid $434.

The Sacramento County Surveyor has Bailiff & Butz's files. I was looking in a file one day when I came across an estimate for a large boundary job...$200.

[Dave Karoly, PLS]

It seems to me that the bigger threat to a private surveying firm from moonlighting individuals is not the occasional public sector surveyor who does a job here in there, but your own moonlighting employee who has access to your records and client base and could lure those clients away on a permanent basis to either their own private practice or to another firm if they leave yours.

That is the traditional way Civil Engineering Firms get started. 2 or 3 of the key employees in the current big fish in town walk out with a bunch of clients in tow and start a new firm. It's happened in Sacramento a couple of times...I heard about one of the big firms here that started from a firm that was big here. The nephew of one of the Partners was still bitter about it when he told me the story ten years ago. That must've been 40 years ago. I think another big one started up about 20 years ago from that firm.

[PLS7393]

My take is if you are actually "Moonlighting" by definition, then I will guess you are not charging enough for their experience either.
They kind of go hand in hand and that hurts the profession more, in my opinion.

[William Magee]

My take is if you are actually "Moonlighting" by definition, then I will guess you are not charging enough for their experience either.
They kind of go hand in hand and that hurts the profession more, in my opinion.

Keith,

that is an assumption and generalization that is not necessarily borne by fact. My personal experiences with the issue have apparently not paralleled yours.

Looking forward to seeing you at the conference.

[TTaylor]

If you are still looking, I would be happy to help and give you my perspective.

BTW, when i was chair of the Leg. Committee, moonlighting was discussed at length and as I recall Dave Wooley had some statutes from other states on the subject.

[PLS7393]

PLS7393 wrote:
My take is if you are actually "Moonlighting" by definition, then I will guess you are not charging enough for their experience either.
They kind of go hand in hand and that hurts the profession more, in my opinion.


Keith,

that is an assumption and generalization that is not necessarily borne by fact. My personal experiences with the issue have apparently not paralleled yours.

Looking forward to seeing you at the conference.

Bill,
I did state "in my opinion", and you are correct about calling it an assumption. Moonlighting by definition is when your using equip or working on company time. To avoid conflict of interest most agencies are ok with a separate business venture if you sign the appropriate documents and get approval from management.

Most individuals performing work outside of their full time job do not carry the appropriate insurance, and other issues so they can charge less.
The smart ones charge a competitive price, so they make a higher profit.

[Stephen Johnson]

The only moonlighting I have ever done was with the full knowledge of my primary employer and that was working under someone else's license on weekends.

I haven't done so as a professional surveyor, though I have had an agreement about work from the area where I grew up and my father had his practice.