Call Center Conflict

[Zaune]

This one happened some years ago, whilst I was working in the delivery-booking call centre for a large British chain of furniture retailers.

Caller (An elderly woman of South-East Asian origin, with fluent English but a strong accent): I'd like it delivered on (date).
Me: Let's see... Damn. Sorry, madam, the computer's not letting me.
(Just for the record, said computer system was so old it used orange-screen dumb terminals, though the ability to send text alerts had been tacked on at some point, and it probably hadn't been a superlative example of software engineering practice when it was new.)
Caller: I don't care! I want it on (date).
Me: I'm sorry, but that's not possible. The computer is only offering me the following dates...
Caller: People make decisions, not computers! Click.
Me: (to a dead line, with some bitterness): Not at my pay grade we don't, madam.

[Phantasee]

That's a pretty good point. If a person can give me a reason why something can't happen, instead of saying that the computer won't let them do it, I'm more understanding.

[PeZook]

That's a pretty good point. If a person can give me a reason why something can't happen, instead of saying that the computer won't let them do it, I'm more understanding.

You're going to try and ask a guy paid minimum wage to type in your ordering details why the system won't let them do something?

Well, good luck with that

[Werrf]

You're going to try and ask a guy paid minimum wage to type in your ordering details why the system won't let them do something?

Well, good luck with that

Yes. Or at least ask them to give a reasonable guess. "I'm sorry, all the available times for that day are already taken" is a lot more palatable for a customer to hear than "The computer won't let me do that, and computers rule our lives".

[PeZook]

Yes. Or at least ask them to give a reasonable guess. "I'm sorry, all the available times for that day are already taken" is a lot more palatable for a customer to hear than "The computer won't let me do that, and computers rule our lives".

So you're more satisfied with a company's customer service if the guy lies to you?

[Soontir C'boath]

Yes. Or at least ask them to give a reasonable guess. "I'm sorry, all the available times for that day are already taken" is a lot more palatable for a customer to hear than "The computer won't let me do that, and computers rule our lives".

So you're more satisfied with a company's customer service if the guy lies to you?

Not all lies are wrong to state. In this case, the customer ended up angry/annoyed rather than just disappointed at missing out on a delivery date.

Anyway, I don't know the policy at his company but even if I was the minimum wage worker, I'd transfer it up to my supervisor. Better that than outright losing a sale and possibly getting a reprimand for that.

[Phantasee]

A company should give its employees enough of an understanding of the process they are involved in to be able to give an educated guess about the source of a problem. If they don't you end up with upset customers and employees who can't give the level of customer service required of them. I never gave that excuse in any of my jobs, I always asked someone with more experience for the reason so that my customer could be informed.

[Zaune]

That's a pretty good point. If a person can give me a reason why something can't happen, instead of saying that the computer won't let them do it, I'm more understanding.

The system had been known to show up with all time-slots for a particular depot free when they hadn't been the last time you'd booked someone in that catchment area, so frankly it was anyone's guess what was going on. For all I know it was configured so that if the relevant time-slot database refused to load, it would return an "all slots vacant" state and then forget to actually change anything. My willingness to make polite excuses for the wretched thing lasted about halfway through my first day on the job.

A company should give its employees enough of an understanding of the process they are involved in to be able to give an educated guess about the source of a problem.

Have I mentioned that as a result of being an agency worker and thus liable to be laid off without notice, severance pay or even a reason, my training lasted about three minutes? Besides, our department only dealt with people who'd already committed to buying the item we were trying to arrange a delivery date for, and I never did find out what the procedure was for cancelling one's order. Perhaps there wasn't one.

Oh, and I must have dealt with two or three customers a week who'd been promised that they could specify their delivery date and time to within an hour (they got to pick AM or PM, and the address closest to the depot got delivered to first), that Saturday deliveries were guaranteed (it was a rare week when there were any Saturday deliveries left by Monday lunchtime) and that they could pick any date between now and the Last Trump (company policy said we could only offer them dates up to two weeks in advance, though the system could go a month forward and I stopped arguing the point after a while). In retrospect I feel vaguely guilty for always reporting these incidents personally to the manager of the branch where the sale was made, because the sales personnel willing to lie through their teeth to make a sale were all that stood between the company and going bust.

[PeZook]

Not all lies are wrong to state. In this case, the customer ended up angry/annoyed rather than just disappointed at missing out on a delivery date.

I know how customers are ; I simply think it's ridiculous and retarded to state, with an aura of superiority, that the keyboard driver at the call centre didn't lie to you, therefore the company's customer service sucks. Here's a thought: "the computer won't let me do it" is a perfectly valid reason for the guy being unable to do something. What's he supposed to do ; Upgrade the system on the fly?

A company should give its employees enough of an understanding of the process they are involved in to be able to give an educated guess about the source of a problem. If they don't you end up with upset customers and employees who can't give the level of customer service required of them. I never gave that excuse in any of my jobs, I always asked someone with more experience for the reason so that my customer could be informed.

Yeah, I know customers demand ridiculous things all the time, I just like to mock them when they try to act as if they're somehow more reasonable than the worker who doesn't know/can't do something through no fault of his own.

[Kanastrous]

The awful thing is that given the state of things the guy at a keyboard in a call center really *might* be a computer engineer or something who's that hard up for work...

[Soontir C'boath]

Not all lies are wrong to state. In this case, the customer ended up angry/annoyed rather than just disappointed at missing out on a delivery date.

I know how customers are ; I simply think it's ridiculous and retarded to state, with an aura of superiority, that the keyboard driver at the call centre didn't lie to you, therefore the company's customer service sucks. Here's a thought: "the computer won't let me do it" is a perfectly valid reason for the guy being unable to do something. What's he supposed to do ; Upgrade the system on the fly?

It's called pen and paper.

[PeZook]

It's called pen and paper.

Oh, smart and condescending! And then what, come down to the loading dock and pester the drivers to squeeze in an additional delivery? Maybe troubleshoot the system while other callers wait on the line? And then when somebody makes a mistake and there's no trace of the order in the system but hastily scribbled notes, take the blame and get fired?

I'm sure in bizarro world people manning call centres are incredibly dedicated and would go through fire so that the holy customer gets his/her delivery precisely when they want to, procedure be damned, but where the rest of us live, they just want to get out of the building at the end of the day and go on to do more interesting stuff without loading themselves down with more work. I'm sure managers love people who violate procedure and make a total mess of things, too. I know I just adore them, after having spent half of yesterday looking for documentation because somebody filed it improperly six months ago "for better accessibility"...

The awful thing is that given the state of things the guy at a keyboard in a call center really *might* be a computer engineer or something who's that hard up for work...

Well, yeah, it is sad, but I still doubt they'd let him take the system apart and fiddle with the parts so that one customer could get his/her order that day

[Soontir C'boath]

It's called pen and paper.

Oh, smart and condescending! And then what, come down to the loading dock and pester the drivers to squeeze in an additional delivery? Maybe troubleshoot the system while other callers wait on the line? And then when somebody makes a mistake and there's no trace of the order in the system but hastily scribbled notes, take the blame and get fired?

Uh, yes, no, and no? So they get their asses off the chair in the call centre and down to the warehouse or just make a phone call down there, so what? Computer technicians are paid to do these kind of things, and you have the scribble of notes showing you took down the order. I hope the mistake wasn't not taking down the credit card information.

Anyway....

I'm sure in bizarro world people manning call centres are incredibly dedicated and would go through fire so that the holy customer gets his/her delivery precisely when they want to, procedure be damned, but where the rest of us live, they just want to get out of the building at the end of the day and go on to do more interesting stuff without loading themselves down with more work. I'm sure managers love people who violate procedure and make a total mess of things, too. I know I just adore them, after having spent half of yesterday looking for documentation because somebody filed it improperly six months ago "for better accessibility"...

If I had a business, I'd expect to allow for computer inefficiencies and/or reduce the amount of loss sales that could've been preventable. Failing to account to these things is not bizzaro land, it's bad policy. Power outages (mute point if it's a phone centre, hahaha) and computer malfunctions can occur and pen and paper can continue sales while the problems exist. Frankly in this day and age when power can get cut or reduced to swathes of areas especially during the summer and when computer technicians need time to fix them, it's stupid to do so.

If that's not how it works at his workplace well that sucks for the business that had lost a sale and a customer who ends up angry and annoyed because people like her and myself do not think computer errors are an excuse. They are just one end to a sale. This is in the point of view of the company and customer and not of the sale representative, mind you.

I suppose a compromise would be, the computer is not allowing the order to be done and we do not take down orders in writing and you can say it's a stupid policy but that's how it is. This way the customer representative doesn't have to lie and the customer walks away disappointed but not indignant.

Although in this case, the order's already been place and she's just asking for a delivery date which I think is a weird way to do it. Having a calling department taking orders and another doing delivery dates. Why not have one large department doing both. Probably bad policy.

[PeZook]

Uh, yes, no, and no? So they get their asses off the chair in the call centre and down to the warehouse or just make a phone call down there, so what? Computer technicians are paid to do these kind of things, and you have the scribble of notes showing you took down the order. I hope the mistake wasn't not taking down the credit card information.

It's one thing to allow for such a thing to be done in an emergency (OMG POWER DOWN WE NEED TO PROCESS ORDERS), another entirely to expect a call centre rep to do it for you every time there is some problem with a system when you can circumvent it by simply booking another date. Believe it or not, disruptions like these do cost money: sometimes, going the extra mile to satisfy one self-important customer means a dozen others go unserviced while the rep is running around with scribbled notes, tearing people away from their usual work, looking for documents, etc (then everything has to be put back on the rails again!). Have you ever wondered why banks try to get people to use ATMs and internet banking as much as possible, for example?

Anyway....

If I had a business, I'd expect to allow for computer inefficiencies and/or reduce the amount of loss sales that could've been preventable. Failing to account to these things is not bizzaro land, it's bad policy. Power outages (mute point if it's a phone centre, hahaha) and computer malfunctions can occur and pen and paper can continue sales while the problems exist. Frankly in this day and age when power can get cut or reduced to swathes of areas especially during the summer and when computer technicians need time to fix them, it's stupid to do so.

Meltdown is one thing ; One does whatever necessary to keep sales going in such situations. Expecting low-paid employees to go an extra mile every time the customer's worldview says something is not a good excuse is another,and that's not sound business policy. Companies live on economies of scale ; Disrupting the work flow by doing non-standard things is costly, inefficient and causes a mess which the company has to pay for later.

But to get back on topic: yes, I do think it's good business policy to tell customers lies they want to hear ; Unfortunately, it's because many customers act as if a simple excuse (the system won't let me) is not good enough, so they expect employees to tell them something or other and won't take no for an answer. I see it all the time at my place of work:

Me: Your laptop is taking longer than expected to diagnose, the problem is probably non-standard.
Customer: Well, when will you have a diagnosis?
Me: I can't tell you the exact date, as I said the problem is not a standard one...

Usually if I say that, the customer goes all "You're a repair shop! How can you not know that?! How incompetent are you?!", so I prefer to lie my ass off and he walks away satisfied.

And then I mock the customer because he's a fucking idiot, and he certainly has no right to act as if he's somehow more rational and superior to the rep who gets paid to do certain things a certain way.

If that's not how it works at his workplace well that sucks for the business that had lost a sale and a customer who ends up angry and annoyed because people like her and myself do not think computer errors are an excuse. They are just one end to a sale. This is in the point of view of the company and customer and not of the sale representative, mind you.

You'd do well to notice he was taking down delivery details, not the order itself. Processing such things outside of the computer system (or whatever procedure is in place) leads to lost time, money and probably more than one delivery for other customers, depending on just how disruptive the whole thing is. Employees who insist on doing their own thing all the time are a freakin' plague, even in creative enterprises like advertising there are some procedures, which are in place for a reason. Sometimes the cost of a lost sale is simply insignificant next to the cost of catering to the customer's special demand ; That's why you pay extra for custom stuff, after all. To take an extreme example, if a company sells ball-point pens, they can't afford to process orders that involve painting every pen of a lot in a different color of the rainbow ; Hell, sometimes it's not worth it to even try and give the guy a price estimate for that special service, because a customer ordering 20 000 standard pens is simply less costly and time-consuming.

[Soontir C'boath]

Uh, yes, no, and no? So they get their asses off the chair in the call centre and down to the warehouse or just make a phone call down there, so what? Computer technicians are paid to do these kind of things, and you have the scribble of notes showing you took down the order. I hope the mistake wasn't not taking down the credit card information.

It's one thing to allow for such a thing to be done in an emergency (OMG POWER DOWN WE NEED TO PROCESS ORDERS), another entirely to expect a call centre rep to do it for you every time there is some problem with a system when you can circumvent it by simply booking another date. Believe it or not, disruptions like these do cost money: sometimes, going the extra mile to satisfy one self-important customer means a dozen others go unserviced while the rep is running around with scribbled notes, tearing people away from their usual work, looking for documents, etc (then everything has to be put back on the rails again!). Have you ever wondered why banks try to get people to use ATMs and internet banking as much as possible, for example?

Wow, you know I didn't think you were serious there. You make it as if it'll certainly take a crapload of time when it could easily be handled at the end of the day and process in a few business days (ever heard that phrase?). The orders instead can be written by hand (on an order or "insert whatever" form would make it easier and more official) instead of typed, collated at the end of the day, and sent off to the next department. It doesn't have to be this hair razing running all over the place idea you seem to have in your head. Nor is it something that tears away other employees from their "usual work". This assumes it isn't already part of their job to process orders done by paper as well.

I am not trying to argue for a company to do things they don't have in their policy to do so. Though it'd always be nice if they changed their policy that will improve productivity. If the company works under an all computer ordering system which gives limited parameters for the employees to work with then no, I won't expect them to "running around with scribbled notes, tearing people away from their usual work, looking for documents, etc" because that's not what they were trained(if they were at all) to do nor how the company should operate in the first place as I don't think that's an efficient way of doing it as well.

By the way, if the ATM goes down, they go to the bank tellers. Which is more equivalent of what would happen here.

Meltdown is one thing ; One does whatever necessary to keep sales going in such situations. Expecting low-paid employees to go an extra mile every time the customer's worldview says something is not a good excuse is another,and that's not sound business policy. Companies live on economies of scale ; Disrupting the work flow by doing non-standard things is costly, inefficient and causes a mess which the company has to pay for later.

Well yes, that would be apparent when the employee works in a company that only give three minutes of training.

I keep finding it hilarious you think it's "going an extra mile" when if anything it's the failure of the company to give the resources and efficient implementation they need. I think it was talked about earlier too.

You'd do well to notice he was taking down delivery details, not the order itself.

Yes, I did in the paragraph you didn't included.

[PeZook]

Wow, you know I didn't think you were serious there. You make it as if it'll certainly take a crapload of time when it could easily be handled at the end of the day and process in a few business days (ever heard that phrase?). The orders instead can be written by hand (on an order or "insert whatever" form would make it easier and more official) instead of typed, collated at the end of the day, and sent off to the next department. It doesn't have to be this hair razing running all over the place idea you seem to have in your head. Nor is it something that tears away other employees from their "usual work". This assumes it isn't already part of their job to process orders done by paper as well.

I was assuming it's not something that's normally done, hence why they have a special computer system set up to handle the booking. However you look at it, processing the matter outside the system will inevitably require extra operations even when there's a procedure set up for it, and it may turn out that you will have to book the customer on a different day anyway, only you will get that information after a certain amount of time. Better to do it right away, saves time and effort.

And yes, it is taking people away from their typical work, because they have to switch to another procedure, then go back to the standard one after they're done processing the order.

I am not trying to argue for a company to do things they don't have in their policy to do so. Though it'd always be nice if they changed their policy that will improve productivity. If the company works under an all computer ordering system which gives limited parameters for the employees to work with then no, I won't expect them to "running around with scribbled notes, tearing people away from their usual work, looking for documents, etc" because that's not what they were trained(if they were at all) to do nor how the company should operate in the first place as I don't think that's an efficient way of doing it as well.

Well, yeah, thank you for seeing my point The guy was given three minutes training, it's virtually a given he will cause a mess.

By the way, if the ATM goes down, they go to the bank tellers. Which is more equivalent of what would happen here.

Yeah, the bank has procedures in place for handling ATM breakdowns, but servicing by a teller is costly and the banks try to avoid it whenever possible. Depending on the bank, sometimes the teller will try to pitch their ATMs to you without even asking what you want

Well yes, that would be apparent when the employee works in a company that only give three minutes of training.

I keep finding it hilarious you think it's "going an extra mile" when if anything it's the failure of the company to give the resources and efficient implementation they need. I think it was talked about earlier too.

Deciding if it's even worth it to give an employee those resources depends on a cost-benefit analysis. If a company operates a gigantic warehouse sending zillions of packages every day, they will often tell their reps to just ignore such special requests or shuffle customers around to other departments, because they prefer to lose a sale than have the shipping department try and locate an item outside the computer system (Or inside it with incomplete information). Ford didn't give a shit about customers desiring different colors for the Model T because he wouldn't have been able to provide them as cheaply (of course, when other companies figured out how to do this, he had to as well).

Yes, I did in the paragraph you didn't included.

Oh. Sorry.

[Soontir C'boath]

I was assuming it's not something that's normally done, hence why they have a special computer system set up to handle the booking. However you look at it, processing the matter outside the system will inevitably require extra operations even when there's a procedure set up for it, and it may turn out that you will have to book the customer on a different day anyway, only you will get that information after a certain amount of time. Better to do it right away, saves time and effort.

I never said operating away from the computer would require the same or less effort though frankly judging from your previous post you seem to like to exaggerate the effort that would be required.

And yes, it is taking people away from their typical work, because they have to switch to another procedure, then go back to the standard one after they're done processing the order.

You're assuming the company would not have it as another standard procedure in synergy.

Well, yeah, thank you for seeing my point The guy was given three minutes training, it's virtually a given he will cause a mess.

My point is, it's a business practice that the person on the phone and myself despise and would like to be handled differently. I have acknowledged long ago that it is limited from doing so.

Yeah, the bank has procedures in place for handling ATM breakdowns, but servicing by a teller is costly and the banks try to avoid it whenever possible. Depending on the bank, sometimes the teller will try to pitch their ATMs to you without even asking what you want

You seem to keep trying to pound this down for some reason. Yes, they try to reduce their use, but they still keep them there. The bank I use no longer prints withdrawal forms and would have you do so at the ATM but that does not mean their policy would then be to completely exclude withdrawal from the tellers because 'it saves money and would not be normal operating procedure anymore'.

Deciding if it's even worth it to give an employee those resources depends on a cost-benefit analysis. If a company operates a gigantic warehouse sending zillions of packages every day, they will often tell their reps to just ignore such special requests or shuffle customers around to other departments, because they prefer to lose a sale than have the shipping department try and locate an item outside the computer system (Or inside it with incomplete information).

So somehow it's actually harder to look at a piece of paper rather than a computer screen to fill out orders? Did we somehow turn blind towards paper and can only see computer screens?

Ford didn't give a shit about customers desiring different colors for the Model T because he wouldn't have been able to provide them as cheaply (of course, when other companies figured out how to do this, he had to as well).

Giving customers limited options on their products is not the same as giving bad customer service. I can happily walk away with a boring black Model T if that's what I wanted. It may not be the same when I come back saying the car's a piece of shit and breaks down a lot (which IIRC did).

[Kanastrous]

Having run to a page-and-a-half I'm wondering if the call-center bit can stand on its own as a separate thread.

Would a mod please consider splitting it to the appropriate forum?

*sacrifices goat*

[Phantasee]

Yes, can we split out the call centre apologist?

[Dalton]

Split from here.

[PeZook]

I never said operating away from the computer would require the same or less effort though frankly judging from your previous post you seem to like to exaggerate the effort that would be required.

Whether or not it's worth it depends on the scale ; If an employee is expected to handle, say, five calls in ten minutes, then even a simple extra set of steps (write information on a form, go to another department, come back) means missed calls, so you get an annoyed customer anyway.

You're assuming the company would not have it as another standard procedure in synergy.

There's no way to make these two procedures work in synnergy, since they cover the same process (arranging a delivery), but paper requires extra operations from the people involved. You can either use on or the other.

My point is, it's a business practice that the person on the phone and myself despise and would like to be handled differently. I have acknowledged long ago that it is limited from doing so.

Can you justify acting all superior to the call centre operator under that, though?

You seem to keep trying to pound this down for some reason. Yes, they try to reduce their use, but they still keep them there. The bank I use no longer prints withdrawal forms and would have you do so at the ATM but that does not mean their policy would then be to completely exclude withdrawal from the tellers because 'it saves money and would not be normal operating procedure anymore'.

It was just an example to illustrate why companies won't always twist and contort to face customer expectations, or will but charge extra for it.

So somehow it's actually harder to look at a piece of paper rather than a computer screen to fill out orders? Did we somehow turn blind towards paper and can only see computer screens?

It's not exactly harder to read, but processing paper inevitably requires extra steps, even if it's just walking around the building with the note/form in hand and filing it properly once everything is done. Why is it so hard to believe the company in the OP wouldn't want to bother, especially when you can just shuffle the customer to a different delivery day?

Giving customers limited options on their products is not the same as giving bad customer service. I can happily walk away with a boring black Model T if that's what I wanted. It may not be the same when I come back saying the car's a piece of shit and breaks down a lot (which IIRC did).

The only reason stated in that thread on why the customer service in that call centre is bad is the complaint the rep won't lie to you (oh, sorry, give an "educated guess"), which somehow makes service better (rather than being a trick to make you go away). Which is technically true, because it produces angry customers, but only because customers have retarded expectations, so they don't really have a right to act all smug and superior.

That's pretty much my point summed up.

[Soontir C'boath]

I never said operating away from the computer would require the same or less effort though frankly judging from your previous post you seem to like to exaggerate the effort that would be required.

Whether or not it's worth it depends on the scale ; If an employee is expected to handle, say, five calls in ten minutes, then even a simple extra set of steps (write information on a form, go to another department, come back) means missed calls, so you get an annoyed customer anyway.

I don't know why you keep thinking the employee has to go to another department "every time" an order comes along which seems to be where you add the waste of time. I doubt they would do what you say in the days before computers came along.

If it's because of delivery dates, the urgency assumed seems to be out of place when it's apparent orders from this company are not necessarily given the next day or so nor would it have to be guaranteed such swiftness in the company policy (in this case of transporting furniture anyway).

There's no way to make these two procedures work in synnergy, since they cover the same process (arranging a delivery), but paper requires extra operations from the people involved. You can either use on or the other.

I suppose all those companies that still uses mail order-catalogs and have to spend money on the catalogs and employees time to process the orders written on the form that comes with the catalog coming in from the mail are a work of fiction...

Boy those mail ordering companies are screwed if it has to be one or the other! I suppose it wasn't synergy when mail catalog companies included the telephone and then onwards to the internet/computer to process orders.

Can you justify acting all superior to the call centre operator under that, though?

No, because the subjective opinion of superiority you seem to grab off the caller only comes from you.

It was just an example to illustrate why companies won't always twist and contort to face customer expectations, or will but charge extra for it.

Oh bull, you're entire argument was that it wasn't normal operating procedure and shouldn't be done while I've just shot you back with your own example of the bank no less that would cost some time and would still be in place.

It doesn't even have to be done through paper. It was just one other option if the computer refuses to work. If the computer program had an override to fill orders when it's clear the computer was wrong, that'd work too.

Remember this all started because the program his company uses is finicky in which he stated that sometimes it wouldn't give delivery dates at times that were suppose to be available. Which means the delivery date the lady wanted could have been available and could have been handled through other means.

I should also remind you again. I have already said this company is limited on what it can do. It has shitty computers and with it already shitty policy. With that I've acknowledged this company can't do what the caller and myself would rather be handled differently.

If you can't get that, then I'm sorry but I am done.

[Mr Bean]

Soontir C'boath not to drag you into an aside but you do understand in the US/UK(plus other countries) that there are dozens of professional call centers that provide call center support for other companies?

As in the people your talking to are not working for Best Buy, they are not working for AT&T, they are not working for JCPenny's or Dillards or Amazon, they are working for XYZ company that professional provides call center operators. I know for a brief stint I worked for several. The OP even mentions the fact that his company was providing another company will call center support. It's much economically cheaper to hire one of these dedicated call center which are 2-3 story large open bay offices cramped with either cubicals or simply desks with phones and computers with centrally located managers to over-watch the drones and occasionally listen in on calls with a supervisor up against a wall to look down one long row of desks/cubicles to handle those "let me talk to your supervisor" crowd

When I actually got a decent job using my computer experience often as not I'd end up going back to these call centers to fix their computers(Boy was the per hour wage difference put a smile on my face every time I did) and I have worked at or with roughly 8 different professional call center companies in my years, two I worked directly for, the rest I worked at with various IT agencies. In all my time, only one and I do mean only one company actually had a call center that was operated by the company it worked for. The rest? They would spend a year hocking Time Warner products after a week's training course, then next year they would be taking order calls for JCPennys catalog. Another year half the call center might go back to working Time Warner calls again while the other half takes Prescription calls for Walgreen's.

Rare is it, and I do mean rare that the person you speak to has anything but a script and a computer which they know how to operate by route. Those with a little bit more knowledge (Say they worked in a Border's store) are paid the same as the 69 year old homemaker who this is her second job, her first being another call center for some other product. Those with any fucking clue about what they sell or services they provide (normally Tier 2 people) are paid much better (The difference is normally anywhere from 60% more to 120% more per hour) and are working at a small scale call-center somewhere. I for example once worked with a Tier 2 branch of a company. Small building, less than 40 call center people plus 10-managers. 18$ an hour to handle calls from car buyers for Ford and they had real Ford call knowledge and could talk handling, gas mileage, and what exactly the interior is made out of on that 2007 Ford F150

They also as it happens, did not work for Ford, but were part of another company.
So Soontir C'boath, do you get what I'm getting at?

[Soontir C'boath]

Yes, the only thing I'm reading is "this is how it is and it cannot be done better, suck it up." To which I say, no.

[Mr Bean]

Yes, the only thing I'm reading is "this is how it is and it cannot be done better, suck it up." To which I say, no.

My friend have you heard of this thing called the profit motive? I don't disagree with you that if we had no reason to make money then of course we could do it better.

By the by, the only company that still runs it own call Centers? Macy's, take that as you will but if you shop at a Macy's and have issues with a store or a shipment, when you do call them (The same is true of Bloomingdales which is owned and run by Macy's but the Macy's call centers take Bloomingdales calls after they put their monocles & Tophats on).

Even there by the by, a Macy's call center employee is expected to handle 25 calls per hour, meaning they have roughly two & a half minutes to get your ass off the phone if you want to be a "good" call center employee. Never mind that some calls can take that long just because the person calling Macy's has no fucking clue what they want, need or why the fuck they called to begin with.