Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Makes Offering Service Blocks a Fireable Offense
Presto Vivace sends in a report from David Pogue at the New York Times, who learned from a Verizon customer service representative that the company has implemented a policy of punishing employees who suggest certain service blocks to customers looking to avoid unwanted or accidental fees. According to the representative, offering (for example) a web access block or premium SMS block without the customer asking for it can now lead to a reprimand or outright termination. The CSRs have also been directed to avoid issuing credits for such charges. "Essentially, we are to upsell customers on the $9.99 25mb/month or $29.99 unlimited packages for customers. Customers are not to be credited for charges unless they ask for the credit. And in cases such as data or premium SMS, where the occurrences may have gone months without the consumer noticing, only an initial credit can be issued."
Is this really such a surprise?
Customer Service: We're not happy until you're not happy.
It is very likely the customer service representatives who are offering those service blocks to better accommodate those customers are the better representatives who are actually trying to do a good job. And people wonder why customer service for some companies is so horrible, it is because of policies like this.
Phone companies are assholes.
Film at 11.
I would rather not see film of their asshole, thank you very much.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
T-mobile, say what you will about its coverage. But it has excellent customer service. They voluntarily suggested these blocks, and they have lower rate plans for people out of contract who don't need subsidized phones. As the market is saturated, most people who want cell phones got them. Those who don't need/want premium service are happy with their two or three year old phones. T-mobile, and others who are offering lower rate plans without phone subsidies are going to retain these customers. And the nickle and dimers like AT&T and Verizon would find it difficult to peel off customers from them.
Account -> Plan -> Set Usage Controls -> Add/Remove Blocks
The source claims that they can be fired if they suggest data blocks unless a customer specifically asks for them.
Verizon's defense was that no employee would be fired for adding a data block if a customer specifically asked for one.
What's really disturbing is that the reporter actually accepted this as a valid defense. Their answer covers when a customer specifically asks for a block, the firing in question occurs when a customer does not.
How specifically do the customers have to ask? Is asking for them to stop these ridiculous charges enough, or do you have to ask for a data block specifically? Would you still have to request download blocking, Vcast blocking, etc. by name?
They designed the phone interface to maximize the frequency of these charges, I'm pretty sure they make stopping them as difficult as possible. As far as companies go, Verizon is among the lowest of the low.
This sentence no verb.
I really don't understand this attitude. There aren't "plenty of other companies to choose from", there are _maybe_ FOUR of any quality and coverage, and they all do the same thing. Simply taking the 'regulation bad, freedom good' line is moronic. Complaining about telco atrocities is almost a standard pastime here on Slashdot, yet when someone suggests a possible solution via actually forcing the telcos to stop raping the consumer the response is 'no regulation'? WTF?! Like they are going to suddenly get all warm and fuzzy and do it on their own?
No, the one thing we do NOT need is more federal regulation. There are plenty of other companies to choose from; pick a prepaid company and work with them.
As a country, we decided a long time ago that consumer protections are more important than allowing the free hand of the market to work its magic.
In other words: just because there are better options, doesn't mean we should allow abusive practices to continue.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
I was given the task of overseeing our company's 102 user Verizon phone bill each month back in Oct. 09. Each month I downloaded the new bill Verizon they put up in an XML format and I threw it into my database. I reduced the bill from about $6000 to $5000 in simple waste and no reduction in service - I could easily drop another $750 with minimal impact affecting only the abusers. Anyways, I noticed in April Verizon started to charge about 60% of the users with a new $1.99 for 1MB usage charge. Now I've seen this 1MB usage charge before, but it was always with one of our users that downloaded a ringtone or had access to the mobile web - it was always attached to something they did. When I called Verizon and spoke with their CSR I asked what the 1MB charge and have they changed anything because there were all these new $1.99 fees. I was told there had been no changes and when I gave them specific examples of users with these fees they said it was for this or that. I had at this point almost 6 months of data and I gave counter-examples for each explanation of what these new 1MB charges were for.
The rep was quickly overwhelmed by my examples and they said they would escalate my case to a tier 2 technical representative. Days go by and I finally get the explanation that the 1MB was for connecting to Verizon's Mobile Web - which was total crap because it's blocked and you can't actually connect. When I asked for clarification they said it was for "trying to connect" even though it is blocked on our plan. I was not satisfied because we went from 2 explainable $1.99 1MB charges a month up to 60+ the next and so the representative requested all of my examples. Two weeks go by and I start to get complaints from our users that they can't text even though they personally pay for text plans. I found out that all of my examples were given full data blocks by the CSR. I had to call and make them reverse all their unauthorized changes but we are still up about $120 each month due to these new charges. It pisses me off to no end and I requested to personally meet with our Verizon rep but that was denied by management and I was told to just let the $120/mo go.
Verizon has to figure out some way to convince Apple that is it evil enough to deserve the iPhone...I'm guessing it went down something like this.
"I mean come on those things are cool, we want to sell them too...we can treat customers just as poorly as AT&T...watch this!!!"
No, the 10% get fired when their bosses find out that they're trying to help the customers.
Looking out for the customer's best interest in terms of the services that the business offers is in the best interest of the business.
Quite. Bean counters don't see this. They don't see the customers walking away...
I happen to be a Certified bean counter and you couldn't possibly be more wrong. If you ever want to understand what is going on in a company, ask the accountants. They know exactly how many customers have walked away, how much money those customers were worth, how expensive those customers were to service, etc. Most of the time they even know exactly why those customers left. If you want to know where the bodies are buried (so to speak) in a company, ask the accountants. But knowledge is not control and blaming the "bean counters" really is a case of shooting the messenger. The finance and accounting geeks just provide analysis and reporting in most cases. They don't control the purse strings.
Accountants are perfectly well aware of the value of good customer service. Accountants however (usually) don't control what gets funding and what doesn't and they certainly don't control how customer service is managed. An accountant's job is to present accurate financial information to management. Ultimately it is management's choice to provide (or not provide) good quality customer service. If you want to blame anyone for bad customer service, the blame starts right at the top where it belongs.
T-mobile call-in customer support is the best of all the big 4 -- And I've had them all, at the same time actually.
I worked for T-Mobile (Indirect) for just under a year, and then for Best buy Mobile (which in my area did Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T)
For the first year at BBM I had a line with all 4 carriers (Discounted, being a sales rep for all the companies) and I frequently called all 4 on a regular basis -- as some actions require you call in, including calling t-mobile when the customers had them and were switching.
My experience showed t-mobile had a consistently well trained staff of CSR's. The only problem with T-Mobile was coverage. Eventually I came to the conclusion that, if signal is fine where you use it, T-Mobile provided the best end-user experience especially when factoring in 'problems' that required customer service help.
Some common issues:
1. ~70% of T-Mobile standing stores are *NOT* Corporately owned by T-Mobile. A large percentage of AT&T And Sprint stores are NOT corporately owned. In these stores your experience will vary but T-Mobile offers their indirect dealers free training by their corporate staff. T-Mobile also is adamant about NOT SIGNING YOU UP if you have poor coverage.
2. T-Mobile's "Coverage map" is the most accurate of all 4 carriers. Verizons coverage map does not give you 'strong' 'moderate' 'weak'.. If you get 1/2 a bar (and thus frequently dropped calls) well.. your call connected, your covered! AT&T I'd put at 2nd best for coverage maps, but TMobile is far, far ahead in honesty here.
3. Customer service hates getting yelled at, avoid the yelling stage at least for 10-15 minutes
4. Sprint's Customer service generally is fairly good, if you can get one of them on the line, you're nice to the rep (after waiting 2-3 hours--though that's getting better), and you're not 'abusing' the system
5. If you buy from an indirect dealer, use them to make any changes for the next 6 months to help avoid breach of secondary contracts. Indirect dealers can frequently give you a better deal ONLY IF YOU COMMIT to features for 6 months. Otherwise the carrier revokes the commission they pay the indirect store and makes them pocket the loss for the phone at that point (so the indirect store *must* have a 2ndary contract to stay in business) -- same with ETF's.
6. Verizon has the "largest 3G network" but their technology limits their maximum speed to be about 60% of what AT&T & T-Mobile can get on 3G. If you have a "3.5g" (HSDPA+) AT&T or T-Mobile phone that variance grows even more -- Assuming you're (a) covered by t-mobile, and (b) not in New York on AT&T
Oh, final note, Verizon & Sprint Share towers, at least for basic calls
AT&T & T-Mobile share towers for basic calls
Make sure your roaming is enabled on your phone (sometimes the feature is well hidden since, obviously, carriers don't want you to roam). Data Services -- especially for at&t/t-mobile don't get shared at 3G speeds -- but are sharable at 2G speeds.
No, the 10% get fired when their bosses find out that they're trying to help the customers.
Actually, 5% get fired. The other 5% get fucked over repeatedly by the company until they quit, which looks better on the books. Things like:
Reprimanded severely for "missing critical training" that was announced and took place during the person's (approved) vacation or during a medical emergency.
Shifts changed repeatedly (day to evening to graveyard and back) or made insane (a day of 12 hours, a day of 8, 2 days of 4, a day of 12).
Supervisor changed repeatedly without notice.
Security harassing a specific person several days in a row because their car was parked improperly (where 'improperly' is trivial stuff like being 2 inches off being perfectly parallel with the parking space lines, not stuff like taking up two spaces). Though I admit that could've just been the security guards being dicks.