The Dirty Secrets of Your Trade
So, Television is a hot bed of lies, deceit and made up competitions. We can't say that we are that surprised... every job is full of this stuff. It's not like the newspapers currently kicking TV whilst it is down are all that innocent.
We'd like you to even things out a bit. Spill the beans on your own trade. Tell us the dirty secrets that the public need to know.
( , Thu 27 Sep 2007, 10:31)
So, Television is a hot bed of lies, deceit and made up competitions. We can't say that we are that surprised... every job is full of this stuff. It's not like the newspapers currently kicking TV whilst it is down are all that innocent.
We'd like you to even things out a bit. Spill the beans on your own trade. Tell us the dirty secrets that the public need to know.
( , Thu 27 Sep 2007, 10:31)
« Go Back
Victory for our IT department ....
...it has been heading towards a new direction for the last few months. This is something which the management have deemed as acceptable, but is quite literally a complete fuckup as far as fuckup ideas go.
Introducing an internal scheme which monitors how well we fix jobs, and picking two random ones from our roughly 800 jobs a month which we manage to do. They analyse it, and then tell us if we are good or crap. A few goods give you a bonus and a few craps get you the boot. The first problem with this system is that it's now ridiculously easy to fail - miss 1 detail and you're out. Take too long and you're out. Not using the person's name alot gets you out. And so on and so on.
Right, now to the other main point to this rating system is that if you fix the customer's issue and they are over the moon, that equates to about 10% of our actual rating. The customer might want my fucking babies and thinks the world of our company, but this rating system still thinks I'm a cunt if I didn't sound too great at one point.
Ground-breakingly, this system has led to most techs in our office to take the piss with customers, all so they get good scores and the extra money while our product goes down the shitter.
It's taken them a good year to realise this isn't a good system and have finally decided to look at whether we've made the customer happy at the end of it instead, which is essentially why our department are here, are we not?
Never sign up with this company for your internet if you can help it. And if you're wondering who they are.....look at the first letter of each paragraph.
( , Mon 1 Oct 2007, 11:09, Reply)
...it has been heading towards a new direction for the last few months. This is something which the management have deemed as acceptable, but is quite literally a complete fuckup as far as fuckup ideas go.
Introducing an internal scheme which monitors how well we fix jobs, and picking two random ones from our roughly 800 jobs a month which we manage to do. They analyse it, and then tell us if we are good or crap. A few goods give you a bonus and a few craps get you the boot. The first problem with this system is that it's now ridiculously easy to fail - miss 1 detail and you're out. Take too long and you're out. Not using the person's name alot gets you out. And so on and so on.
Right, now to the other main point to this rating system is that if you fix the customer's issue and they are over the moon, that equates to about 10% of our actual rating. The customer might want my fucking babies and thinks the world of our company, but this rating system still thinks I'm a cunt if I didn't sound too great at one point.
Ground-breakingly, this system has led to most techs in our office to take the piss with customers, all so they get good scores and the extra money while our product goes down the shitter.
It's taken them a good year to realise this isn't a good system and have finally decided to look at whether we've made the customer happy at the end of it instead, which is essentially why our department are here, are we not?
Never sign up with this company for your internet if you can help it. And if you're wondering who they are.....look at the first letter of each paragraph.
( , Mon 1 Oct 2007, 11:09, Reply)
« Go Back