Invisible wrote:
> ...except that she doesn't do that any more. She ended up in the call 
> center because she was getting too old for lugging ladders and stuff 
> around in all weather.

Oh. I imagine there's lots of call for call-center work, or for managemen
t 
and training of people to pull wires and such. As long as she doesn't giv
e 
up as easily as you do. ;-)

> Well, this is it. The call handling target *was* 500 seconds per call.
> It should be self-evident that this is completely impossible.

Not at all.

> - If somebody calls you and spends 25 minutes screaming at you about ho
w 
> **** your company is before they will even tell you what they're callin
g 
> about, you cannot complete the call in 500 seconds. [Yes, this is 
> apparently a *daily* occurrance. Some people apparently think they're 
> important or something.]

I really can't imagine why she cares, other than it takes too long. I can
't 
imagine how that could bother you emotionally, to have some loonie rantin
g 
about the company you work for.

> - If some little old lady calls you, and you have to repeat yourself si
x 
> times before she even hears what you said properly (never mind 
> understands what you're asking), you cannot complete the call in 500 
> seconds.

True.

> - If you have to transfer the call to another department, and they take
 
> 20 minutes to pick up the phone, you cannot end in the call in 500 seco
nds.

Sure you can. Watch:   "Here, let me transfer you to the billing 
department."  Then you hang up on them.

Why do you think call centers have such a bad reputation?

> Oh, you're still expected to do the  same *work*, just faster.

No, you're expected to hang up after that many seconds. "Sorry, got 
disconnected."

> You're also not supposed to hang up. 

Not on purpose at least.

> Apparently the only people more unreasonably than the company is the 
> customers. Like the people running a business from their house. Phone 
> stops working, they want 4-hour turnaround fixing it, or else £1,0
00 per 
> hour for every hour they're out of service, because that's how much 
> money they claim to be losing by not having a phone. But, obviously, 
> these people are paying residential phone rates....... Um, yeah, nice t
ry.

It's not unreasonable to *ask*. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
     Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
       Then he is not omnipotent.
     Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
       Then he is malevolent.

Post a reply to this message