Don't worry, eBay Buyer Protection will protect you

If you've ever used eBay or PayPal, you're probably familiar with their heavily advertised buyer protection.  If not, here's the graphic advertisement which effectively sums it up:

It's easy to make things FREE when they don't actually exist.

The only problem is that, if you've ever tried to use this so-called buyer protection, you find out that there's really no buyer protection at all.  This post will be short because it's as simple as that: there is simply no buyer protection.  (By the way, same goes for sellers: there is no seller protection.  The only one protected is eBay.)  If you don't believe me, Google it.

As an informed consumer, one way to protect yourself is to always pay with a credit card instead of PayPal's e-check or ACH transfer.  All the major credit card companies are pretty good with protecting you from online purchases gone wrong.  Best part, it's free.

During the checkout process, PayPal can often be misleading, letting you think that you're paying with a credit card.  For example, it may say something like "AMEX *******1234 will be used if your bank account has insufficient funds."  So look out for the small font.

Doubt of Business: 1, USA Jobs: 0

You have to celebrate the small wins, and I'll take credit for one this month.  I wrote a post in April about the federal government's official jobs website, calling out a major error in their applicant eligibility questionnaire.  Just this month, I'm happy to report a new release of the USA Jobs website.  Why it's taken so long and why they had to completely redesign the website for a simple change in list items is beyond me, but hey, it makes sense now:

Well, the wording is still confusing as hell, but at least the bullet points are structured correctly!

In case you were confused about how to vote in San Fran ...

... this should pretty much clear it all up

Bank of America: Every little bailout helps

After banking with Bank of America for 16 years, I finally just couldn't handle it anymore and waved goodbye.  An article in today's Wall Street Journal prompted me to write this post today.

About a month ago I made a mistake while paying a credit card bill online.  I accidentally selected the wrong account, and unfortunately that account's balance was too low to pay the bill.  I immediately called both Bank of America and American Express and informed them of my mistake.  American Express was understanding, cancelled the transaction, and informed me they would reimburse me if I would be charged any fees on their end.

Bank of America told me it was too late, the amount had already been overdrawn, would be returned, and I would be charged a $35 non-sufficient funds fee.  Fair enough, I thought.  After all, this was my mistake. 

A few days later I get another email from Bank of America alerting me to a non-sufficient funds transaction and corresponding $35 fee.  Then this happened again 2 days later.  I called Bank of America, and after being transferred around the globe a handful of times, I was informed that they kept trying to pay the American Express bill on my behalf!  Certainly this was a mistake on their part, right?  Certainly they would refund me all or some of the $105 non-sufficient fund fees I've racked up.  Nope!

In that same phone call I asked to close all my accounts.  They seemed a little too efficient in this process, and the agent informed me I would receive a check within a couple weeks.  Perhaps as a final "f- you" from Bank of America, I received yet a fourth notice in the mail just a few days ago:

As an interesting side note, take a look at the customer feedback survey on the top. 
Have you ever seen a survey require the customer to pay for postage?

Yes, apparently my account was overdrawn by 1 penny when they closed it.  You can't make this stuff up!

Realtors Run Amok, Part 1 of a Series on Realtors

I'm sorry I haven't posted in a while, but rest assured that I've been thinking a lot about DoB issues. One thing that I keep reflecting on is the idea of obsolete industries. One such industry, IMHO, is residential real estate. I have so much to say about this issue that I've decided to start a series, and this is just part 1.

Home sellers and buyers pay too much and receive too little for realtors’ services. This is mainly due to a complete misalignment of incentives among the four primary stakeholders: sellers, buyers, sellers’agents, and buyers’ agents. Furthermore, home buyers are even more unique because they do not always share the one common aim of the other three stakeholders: to broker the sale of property.

Home Sellers

A home seller’s objective is to sell their home at the highest price possible. Accomplishing this requires a lot of “traffic” (legitimate and qualified buyers viewing the home) and a lot of dedicated and specific work on the part of the realtor. Specifically, the realtor would need to actively market the home through specialized channels and differentiate it from the other homes on the market. For example, a home with a large, fenced backyard is going to be more valuable to a buyer with a dog; therefore, target marketing the home to buyers with dogs would provide more value to both the buyer and seller.

Seller Agents

Unfortunately, the incentives of seller agents are not usually aligned with the sellers they represent. For a sizable and steady income, seller agents (also referred to as listing agents) focus on volume – they simply want to sell as many homes as possible and thereby have no time to market via specialized channels, as exemplified with the home with the large, fenced yard. Experts and novices alike agree that low-priced homes are more likely to sell than comparable, higher priced homes. Accordingly, it is in the seller agents’best interests to price their homes low. Furthermore, because a typical seller agent’s commission is only 3%, he or she would be more willing to budge on price negotiations than the seller. For example, a $10,000 price change may represent a significant loss of capital gains for the seller; for the realtor, however, it’s a loss of only $300. This $300 is neglibile when compared to the overall commission (i.e., assuming the house lists for $210,000 and sells for $200,000, the realtor makes $6,000 and the owner loses $10,000). Generally speaking, sellers are much more susceptible to downside than seller agents. For those finacial practitioners out there, this is equivalent to a negatively skewed investment paradigm.

Buyer Agents

Buyer agents have entirely different incentives from seller agents. While they do care about volume for the same reasons as seller agents, the pace at which they broker purchases is almost entirely based on their buyers’ motivation to purchase a home. With nearly 100% of buyers having access to the internet -- and specifically www.realtor.com -- many do their own research prior to contacting a realtor. Consequently, a selection bias may exist where buyer agents are more likely to take on clients who know what they want. In reality, the true added value of a buyer agent is helping find the client a good home. Therefore, even if a buyer agent selects a client who needs an above average level of assistance, the agent will be incented to find the easiest homes to market (e.g., those that are well priced.) Once again to reference financial terms, buyer agents do not possess a fiduciary responsibility toward their client.

Home Buyers

Home buyers may be described as the “innocent bystander” in this debacle of an industry. Buyers can be summarized into two groups: those who don’t need realtors and those who do. The buyers who don’t need realtors do their own research and know what they’re looking for. However, since 90%of homes are sold via realtors, these buyers will need to pay a realtor anyway. (Note that buyers typically do not pay their realtor’s fees. The fees are usually paid by the seller and are based on a commission of the final selling price. However, since the seller knows this, he or she will typically “embed” the cost for the buyer’s agent into the selling price.) The buyers who do need realtors have ready access to them, but as mentioned above, their realtor’s incentives may not be aligned with the buyer.

In the next part of this series, I'll provide a pretty interesting historical context about why the situation is as bad as it is.

How many times should your phone ring?

Why do cell phones only ring 4 times before voicemail picks up?  I’m sure that I can’t be the only one in the world who misses a decent number of calls because I don’t have a chance to pick up.  It doesn’t matter where I am… If I’m outside, it might be a ring or 2 before I even realize my phones ringing, and by the time I stop what I’m doing and retrieve it from my pocket, “Missed Call.”  If I’m inside, especially at home, if I hear the phone ring, it takes me at least a few rings to remember where the hell I left it.  And I’d imagine women have it even worse, with it typically buttoned up inside a purse.

I’ve actually tried calling my phone provider to see if I can adjust the number of rings, and interestingly enough, I learned that Verizon used to do this, but now it’s a standard 4 rings for everyone.  I’ve also found that VOIP and home lines typically offer minimal customization of rings, and the max allowed I’ve ever seen is 6 rings.

I’m looking for something like 8 rings!  Furthermore, I even think 6 or 8 rings should be the standard, not a measly 4.  I have two excellent reasons for this.

First, like I mentioned before, it’s sometimes difficult to answer the phone within 4 rings, especially if your cell phone vibrates for the first ring (which is exceedingly convenient if you’re in a meeting and forget to turn it to silent).  If you’re at home, no more running around the house, up and down stairs, and checking your bags for your phone.  Just take your leisurely time to answer the phone.

The second reason this is a great idea is to provide an automatic filter on voicemail.  If someone only has to wait 4 rings to leave you a message, than they’re probably going to let it ring and leave a message regardless of the importance of the call.  However, if they have to wait 8 rings, they may now think twice about leaving a message.  If they choose not to leave a message, then the way I see it is that it clearly wasn’t that important to begin with (or they’ll text or email me, etc).

At the end of the day, leave it up to the consumer to customize.  There’s an idea that can help lots of businesses.

.

How DirecTV "Supports" the Military

A while back I was in the military, and one of my secondary responsibilities was to manage our unit’s morale and recreation program.  We primarily brought in money by operating vending machines and selling some food during lunch.  While we spent our funds on a number of various events, such as picnics and outings, one of the more popular things was us having DirecTV, including all the great add-ons, such as NFL Sunday Ticket and MLB Extra Innings.

As the program manager, I was responsible for setting up our DirecTV service.  I made sure we got the best negotiated price, arranged for the installation, and paid the bills.  For the most part, this was a relatively straightforward satellite package; really, the only difference was that instead of the service being in a single person’s name, it was a corporate account, so it was in our unit’s name.  There was one potentially complicating factor, however.  Our unit was going to be disbanded* in 9 months, and the typical DirecTV contract is for 1 year.  I communicated this to our salesperson, and he said that this would absolutely not be a problem, annotated this on the account, and included it in the contract.

(*Units being disbanded is not uncommon.  For example, units can be disbanded in association with BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure), upon completing specific missions, or decommissioning of naval vessels.)

Over the next 9 months, we all thoroughly enjoyed our satellite programming, and sometimes we even purchased special PPV events (e.g., UFC), and all bills were paid on time.  When there was about 1 week remaining prior to our unit being officially disbanded and remaining personnel to be redistributed to several hundred different units, I called up DirecTV to inform them that we would be stopping our service.  As a bonus, I was going to hand over our dish and receivers to a nearby unit that was just starting the disbanding process, and they would start new DirecTV service and utilize it for about a year.  This, no doubt, was a win-win for both DirecTV and the other unit.

As you probably expected, I was told by customer service that we were in a one year contract and we would have to pay a $350 cancellation fee for early termination.  Supervisor after supervisor told me the same thing, until finally I was told I’d get a call back from a “special” department.

I did get a call several days later, literally on the day that we were saying our goodbyes and disbanding the unit.  The agent told me that we would not be required to pay the cancellation fee, but we would have to send a letter announcing our circumstances on command letterhead.  I informed the agent that we unfortunately no longer had computers and printers, let alone letterhead, and that for all intents and purposes, we were effectively a corporation going out of business.  He claimed that if DirecTV didn’t receive the letter within 3 weeks, we would have to pay the cancellation fee.  Apparently it didn’t matter that it was already annotated on the account.  I exclaimed to him that there would not be anyone to pay the cancellation fee, but of course to no avail.

About a year later, I get a call (on my mobile) from DirecTV collections department, asking me if they had reached our military unit.  I told them that I used to be affiliated with the unit, but it no longer exists.  They then asked who was responsible for paying the bills, and I said “we’re out of business – there’s no one here anymore.”  Wisely, the collections agent asked, “The military is not out of business, so who can I reach to pay the bill?”  More wisely, I gave the agent the phone number to the office of the Undersecretary of Defense Comptroller’s office.  For those of you who have tried to reach someone via a government phone number, you’d know the endless labyrinth of phone systems in which this collections agent was about to embark.

A couple years later, and maybe once or twice a year since then, I get a phone call from DirecTV collections, and with a smile on my face, still hoping to have the last laugh, I kindly say, “you must have the wrong number.”

Budget Car Rental: You Can Judge a Company By Its Name

I've been travelling a lot lately. While this serves as an excuse to my lack of postings, I can promise you I have a vault full of great DoB stories.

I rented a car from Budget recently, and I noticed an odd smell when I first drove off the lot. It took me about 15 minutes and watery eyes before I figured out that the car, despite having only 5,000 miles, had been heavily smoked in. I also noticed the large "NON-SMOKING" stickers on the windows which declared a $250 fine for smoking. Once I got to my hotel (about 30 minutes from the car rental location), I called Budget to tell them about the issue. I was neither looking for a different car nor any type of credit; rather, I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't going to be inadvertently charged the fine. The customer service representative informed me that I had 2 options. One option was to bring the car back to the rental location and swap it out for a different car. The second option was to risk paying the $250 fine. Yeah, so thanks a lot.

Ignoring the smoke infusion issue for the time being, I went to use the car the next day and found a partially flat tire. That's when I remembered that the tire pressure warning light did indeed come on shortly after leaving the airport, but I was too busy gasping for fresh air that I didn't notice. I looked up the nearest Budget location to my hotel, and took the car there to see what they could do about the flat tire.

I pulled up front to the Budget office (it was in an urban area, so I wanted to check in before I found a parking space), I informed the agent of my situation,  and she told me I had to park first. About 20 minutes had elapsed by the time I drove to the parking garage and walked back. The agent then found it convenient to inform me that they had no vehicles available and that I had 2 options. One option was for me to replace the tire with the spare. The second option was to call roadside assistance. Again, thanks a lot.

For the sake of keeping this post short, I'll skip the parts about there not being a spare tire,  about waiting on hold for roadside assistance for 45 minutes, and about me showing the garage mechanic how to use an air compressor. In the end, I was informed that it would take between 1 and 8 hours for Budget to come and bring a new car (since there was no spare tire) and that I would have to be there when the tow truck came. I was also informed that there was no way that the 8-hour window could be reduced. Oh, and by the way, we were on vacation. So, again, thanks a lot!

Why Microsoft’s Mobile Screw-up is Worse Than They Realize

It was not long ago when popular Microsoft products such as Windows, Office, Outlook, Internet Explorer, etc. were used for just about everything.  Macs continue to erode the Windows gold standard operating systems.  Firefox, Safari, and Chrome have made the once monopolistic Internet Explorer capture only 50% of the internet browser market today.  And Open Office and Google Docs are starting to steal users from Microsoft’s profitable Office suite, especially rendering their complex collaboration features obsolete.

The one thing that may appear to be stable today is Microsoft Outlook and the associated Exchange client-server.  For those not familiar, the basic idea of Microsoft Exchange is that it provides a powerful email, scheduling, and global address service for medium and large businesses.  The Exchange server acts as the back-end service while Outlook (the Exchange client) provides end-users with email, calendar, contacts and task tools, among other features.

It was also not too long ago when Windows Mobile was a powerful operating system for mobile phones.  While never priding itself as a great web browsing or multi-media experience, the one thing Windows Mobile operating systems have had are native Exchange clients.  In other words, Microsoft Outlook penetrated much of the pre-installed software on the phone.  Unlike a lot of other “bloatware” that comes preloaded on phones, the native Exchange was actually a good thing.  Emails would be delivered directly to your Messages app, phone numbers of Outlook contacts would be stored in the phonebook, and calendar items would synchronize between your phone and Outlook automatically and over the air.

Realizing that Microsoft Exchange nearly served the complete market of enterprise businesses, iPhone, BlackBerry, and Android incorporate Exchange synchronization and functionality.  However, as one would expect, the synchronization is not nearly as seamless as it is on a Windows Mobile phone.  For instance, fields that may contain data in an Outlook contact may not be available on a BlackBerry.  Another example is that calendar/appointment reminders are different between Outlook and iPhone.  And perhaps worst of all, the powerful Outlook task list doesn’t even synchronize with Android mobile operating systems.

Given the utility of a Windows Mobile phone with a native Exchange client, it had everything going for it.  The whole Microsoft ecosystem could be leveraged.  As other phone manufacturers and mobile operating systems began to gain popularity, Microsoft just rode its laurels.  This is not news though – we all know this, and Steve Ballmer eventually fired the head of mobile.

"Right now, [Microsoft] is selling millions and millions and millions of phones, and Apple is selling zero."

After Microsoft’s mocking of the iPhone, they effectively disappeared from the landscape of mobile phones.  They have tried to reinvigorate the product with Windows Phone 7, but this has all but failed.  (On a side note, there are 6 unique models of Windows Phone, and none are available on Verizon and not one has a fixed qwerty keyboard.  Who are they actually trying to compete with?)  But the worst is yet to come.  Because of this mobile screw-up, Microsoft’s “old faithful” – the Exchange server and Outlook client – are in trouble.  Why would users deal with the inconsistent integration of Exchange into other mobile phones when they can just use native applications, e.g., gmail and calendar for Android?  Indeed, Google Apps is being heavily marketed toward enterprise customers.  Google doesn’t currently have a task list, but something like it has to be in the works.

Therefore, because more work is continually conducted on mobiles, and because almost no one uses Windows Phones, enterprise customers may likely start switching to other services offered as native applications on mobile phones, such as those offered by Apple or Google.  The logical next step would be for those enterprise customers to adapt their office workstations to the new clients.  Losing Exchange server and Outlook revenue is when Microsoft’s real blood bath will begin.

Delta Airlines: A Round Trip Experience

The Departure

Our plane had left the gate in Washington, DC, and I was to fly up to New York City for a conference. I was probably engrossed in the most recent issue of Sky Mall for quite a while before I realized that the plane had been sitting on the tarmac, not moving for at least 15 minutes. I looked around and saw the flight attendant, and she informed me that there were major backups on the runway, and that we would have to wait our turn.

Fair enough, I thought. This was not uncommon and just the nature of air travel. But one hour later, not only had we not moved but there were also no announcements. I again turned to the responsive flight attendant, who apologized for not really knowing the status.

Another hour went by. This is all literal; I promise I’m not exaggerating (anyone who’s flown before knows that no exaggeration is necessary when it comes to airline horror stories). At this point, we had been sitting on the tarmac for over 2 hours. I thought to myself, if we don’t leave in 15 minutes, there’s no point in me even flying up to NYC anymore. I told this to the flight attendant, who asked me more information about it. “Where’s the conference?” she asked. “What time does it start, and what’s the latest it would make sense for you to arrive?” Her questions were obscure, but I humored her and answer them. She excused herself and headed toward the front of the plane.

A few minutes later she returns and says, “Thankfully you spoke up, sir. The pilots now have an urgency reason to tell the control tower … this should allow us to take off shortly.” Before I could gasp out of surprise, the captain announces that we’re next in line for takeoff. I assumed that she was being sarcastic with me, and I asked for clarification. She explained that it was Delta’s policy to prioritize departures based not just on the original departure time but also the priority level of passengers. As a master of the art of subtle sarcasm, I can tell you that she was telling the truth.

The flight attendant then proceeds to tell other passengers around me that I’m the one who deserves credit for the plane finally departing. Naturally, they questioned the absurdity of this, and her basic answer was, “All you had to do was ask.”

The Return

I’m not entirely convinced that overselling flights is a good business decision, but I am happy to volunteer for the voucher when it’s convenient for me.  Needless to say, my return flight was overbooked, and I was selected as a volunteer.  I stood aside while the plane was boarded, eagerly awaiting my $400 voucher, meal ticket, and hotel reservation.  The jet way door shuts, and moments later the plane begins pulling away.

Just like real money, it cannot be replaced if lost.

I continued to wait at the desk while the gate agent radioed back and forth with another individual, sounding like they were arguing about numbers.  The gate agent turned to me, and said that there was actually an open seat and they had miscounted.

They miscounted. How does this happen so often? People have to check in for their flights, and a computer scans each individual boarding pass as passengers board.  If that isn’t enough, the flight attendants walk the aisles a number of times, and I would think that an empty seat on a supposedly oversold flight would be pretty damn obvious.

The plane pulls back up to the gate, the jet way door reopens, and I’m rushed aboard the plane.  As I make my way to the back of the plane, I’m given looks of disgust by other passengers who reasonably assume that I was running late and was responsible for holding up their departure.  I head home with no $400 voucher, no available overheard cargo space, and more personal disgust of airlines.

You can’t make this stuff up.

The Black Magic of Kiducation

Photo taken in Waterford, CT

There are no words.

Time Warner Cable: A case on how not to model a company's culture

Over a twelve year period, I moved about ten times, providing me the opportunity to deal with a number of cable/satellite companies, predominantly Time Warner, Comcast, DirecTV, and Cox. They're all bad. But TWC is the worst. Actually, the experience mentioned below was the original inspiration for this blog.

When I moved to my current location of Durham, NC, I signed up for a special promotion of $30 per month for digital cable. The price was to include an HDTV digital cable box, a remote, the basic cable channels, and one outlet. (Time Warner Cable, unlike all other cable companies I've dealt with, actually charges more per outlet.) I prepaid the first month and scheduled the installation.

It took a few weeks to have the service set up, and when I received my first bill, I was charged $60 - $45 for monthly service and $15 for a past due balance. I obviously inquired about this, and I was told that they were no longer running the $30/month promotion. I informed them that there must be a mistake, since I had signed up with the $30/month promotion, which could even be proven by my prepayment of $30. The customer service agent (who was pretty kind, relatively speaking) said there was nothing she could do, blaming it mainly on the computer. After I told her that I wouldn't continue the service if they wouldn't honor the original rate, she told me, in exact words: "Sir, I would do the same thing if I were in your shoes. Unfortunately, there's nothing I can do."

Of course my threat was empty, and I continued to pay the extra $15 per month to get my cable service. After one year, my price shot up to $80 per month for basic cable! I called and asked if I could get a better rate, and they offered me $75 - a $5 discount! Figuring that I could probably negotiate a better deal if I tried to cancel my service, I asked to be transferred to the cancellation department. The agent said that he could actually cancel my service himself, and before I could say, "is that what you really want to do?", my service was cancelled. And that was the end of that.

No worries, though. For a one time payment of $45, I bought this beautiful antenna:

Not your grandparent's old fashioned "rabbit ears."

I get all the stations I watch most in High Definition and for FREE. The only thing I miss out on is ESPN, but thankfully I have ESPN 3 through my DSL internet service.

Bottom line: Time Warner's complete inability to empower their employees and its company culture of not putting the customer first lost them yet another customer. You can't make this stuff up!

Cell phones replacing airlines in the hospitality industry

Traditionally, hotels, airlines, and rental car companies have been considered the heavyweights of the hospitality industry since they compete solely on their level of customer service.  The argument is that there is limited ways to differentiate a Hyatt and Marriott hotel room, and margins are pretty much fixed.  Therefore, a company would gain its competitive edge through hospitality, or exceptional customer service.

Airlines once were considered part of the hospitality industry, but, today, no one would argue that they set any standard for exceptional customer service.  In theory airlines should not have much to compete on: again, margins are fairly fixed, and success is binary (i.e., the plane either lands safely or crashes).  Unfortunately, heavy federal and state government regulation effectively cause an oligopoly in the industry.  The end result is that consumers are usually left with only one option at a reasonable fare.

Interestingly, cell phone carriers (e.g., Verizon, AT&T) appear to be replacing airlines' component in the hospitality industry.  If not already, eventually the service coverage of all carriers will converge, and they will have nothing to compete on other than hospitality.  This already seems to be the case, at least between Sprint and Verizon, who have begun empowering their employees to satisfy customers at all costs.

USA Jobs

Would you invest in a company that lost $2 trillion last year and has a negative net worth of $44 trillion? The “company” is of course the U.S. government, and this was the headline story of a recent issue of Bloomberg Businessweek. Now, I have a lot of correct opinions about politics, the economy, and government in general, but that is neither the point of this article nor the theme of this blog. Rather, let’s look at www.USAJobs.gov, the U.S. government’s primary source for hiring. If any corporation approached hiring in the same manner as USAJobs.gov, they would be out of business within months.

Those who have applied for government jobs are probably already familiar with the frustrations of the application process. Those who are not familiar can just click on any random job posting; you can begin to imagine the frustration by just glancing over the job description (if that’s even what you want to call it.)

Let me bring to your attention 3 complete absurdities about USAJobs.gov:

1) They apparently don't edit or review their work

Throughout the website, including on the “Advanced Search” page, there is an “Applicant Eligibility” question. Ignore for the moment the fact that the jargon it uses is meaningless to the average person (e.g., interchange agreement, competitive service by statute, non-competitive appointment, etc.). It’s basically a Yes or No question which asks you if you meet certain requirements, and it is actually very important and applicable to many government jobs. Yet some lazy bureaucrat has formatted the bulleted list wrong!

Screen shot taken in February 2011

The final 2 bullets (about veterans’ preference and appointment eligibility) are independent from Federal civilian employees with non-temporary appointments.  In other words, it should read like this:

Are you:

• A current or former Federal civilian employee who holds or held a non-temporary appointment
• in the competitive service in the Executive Branch or in a position not in the Executive branch specifically included in the competitive service by statute, or
• in an expected service position covered by an interchange agreement, or
• eligible for reinstatement?
• A veteran eligible for veterans' preference or separated from the armed forces under honorable conditions after 3 years or more of continuous military service?
• A person with non-competitive appointment eligibility?

In fact, if you don’t believe me, just look at the help menu.  It’s formatted correctly there.  You can also simply read it like a sentence and see that it does not make sense.  For example, it would read like this:

“Are you a current of former Federal civilian employee who holds or held a non-temporary appointment a person with non-competitive appointment eligibility?”

Why is this important?  Because the website which represents tens of thousands of government jobs can’t even figure out how to properly ask questions!

Being the good citizen I am, I promptly informed customer service of this several weeks ago (in February 2011).  All I received in return was someone explaining to me what the technical jargon means.  (Just for reference, I am one of the few who probably know what the jargon means.)  After exchanging a few more emails, I was eventually told: "Your comments and/or suggestions will be considered as we make improvements to the website" and that my request would be handled by the appropriate authority.

At least the website design is nice!

2) Your application may not even be reviewed by a qualified hiring manager

So let’s say you get past the difficulties of figuring out what a job description means and are miraculously able to submit an application.  Have you considered who actually looks at the resumes and applications?

A friend of mine works for a well-known government contractor, and he is currently assigned to a high-profile agency.  That agency had an online job posting.  Apparently the hiring manager at the agency didn’t feel it necessary to find the right fit.  Instead, he or she asked my friend (who’s been out of college for less than a year) to pick the new hire.  So there was this contractor, several levels removed from the actual agency, making a hiring decision.

3) The turnaround time is an embarrassment

Sometimes when you apply for a job you hear the bad news right away or within a few months.  Sometimes you may not hear any bad news at all, and so assume no news is bad news.  However, my wife recently received bad news about a position she applied for at the Justice Department … SIX years after submitting the application.

You can’t make this stuff up!

United Airlines - Part 2

Note: This is a continuation from my post dated March 26.  Sorry to have pulled a “Kill Bill” and unnecessarily separated it into two posts, surely keeping you up at night due to the suspense.  It was just a long story and seemed too long for a single blog post.  Anyway…

After learning that my name has been broadcast on the airport PA system, I approach the gate agent to see what the issue is and also to [hopefully] retrieve my boarding pass.  Thankfully – and surprisingly – she hands me a boarding pass and seat assignment after I hand over my Departure Management Card.  She then walks around from behind the desk, and without hesitation, points to my bag and says, “I’m going to need to check that bag.”  (At this point you should ask yourself if you’ve ever seen a gate agent walk out from behind their unreasonably high ticket counter for any reason.)  Realizing that she clearly received a call from my bigoted buddy from before, I nearly flipped out.  Instead, I looked around and saw a little “box-measuring-bar thing.”

Prior to showing the agent lady it would fit, I did hesitate, as the little “box-measuring-bar thing” did look quite small.  However, I looked around the waiting area and reassured myself after seeing how much larger everyone else’s bags were.  Unsurprisingly and perhaps anticlimactically, it fit just fine (I did have to shove it in, but those stupid templates are conservatively small).  I figured if she had a problem with me shoving it into the little “box-measuring-bar thing,” I was going to point out other peoples’ bags and risk being hated by my fellow passengers.  She agreed to let me carry it on, but did ask one last time, “I can still check it if you want.”

Needless to say, the bag fit in the overhead compartment.  In fact, it fit any way I wanted to place it in there: in line with or perpendicular to the compartment, and even on its side!  There was even extra space to put my coat on top of it!

At this point, I had forgotten about Economy Plus, which basically started this whole fiasco.  The plane was only about two-thirds full, and after take-off, some poor soul decided to move seats.  I don’t blame him—he had a middle seat between two jolly fellows and there was an entire row open three rows ahead.  Once we were in the air and the fasten seat belt sign went off, he moved forward.  Unfortunately, he didn’t even have a chance to sit down when the SS flight attendant stopped him.  The man was told that he would have to return to his assigned seat or pay the $50 change fee!  He wasn’t trying to move to first class or even an exit row.  One-third of coach was empty, and they wanted to charge him to change seats!

There are few companies whose business practices I doubt more than United Airlines, and I would not be surprised if they go out of business (again), especially after completing the merger with Continental.  I'm sure that my gripes won't get as much attention as "United Breaks Guitars," but you'd think that United would have learned a lesson or two after suffering one of the worst PR nightmares in the history of the world:

In case you were not aware of this story, United broke Dave Carroll’s guitar and refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing.  To respond, Carroll put together this music video, and on the 2 days after posting it on YouTube, United’s stock dropped nearly 5% (in excess of the market's fluctuations).  This equated to the company losing about $90 MILLION dollars of value.

You can't make this stuff up!

United Airlines - Part 1

Have you heard of Economy Plus?  It's the new crime being committed by airlines and the origin of today's ridiculous story.  I wasn’t really upset when airlines stopped serving—and then started charging for—food.  I also wasn’t even that upset when they started charging for soft drinks (which no longer applies on most airlines).  I was, however, quite irked when they started charging for checked bags, especially since it makes MORE sense (from the airline’s perspective) to charge for carry-on bags: carry-on bags, unlike checked bags, increase lines in airport security, are a greater security threat, and significantly slow down boarding and deplaning.  But this United Economy Plus nonsense is the most frustrating.

I purchased a ticket for about $400, roundtrip to Denver, Colorado.  When I went to check-in 24 hours prior, I was asked if I wanted to pick a seat.  “Of course,” I thought. Seeing that the front half of the plane was almost completely available, I selected my seats, clicked “Next,” and then was told the charge would be $65!  Apparently, the new way United has decided to make a buck is by charging people for Economy Plus, which allows passengers to:

• Select their seats
• Have 5 extra inches of legroom
• Board "early"
• And pay a hefty $65!

There being no way I was going to do this, I cancelled and continued the check-in process without selecting seats.  When it came time to print the boarding passes, I discovered that instead of getting a normal boarding pass, I got something called a “Departure Management Card”—the same thing you get when a flight is overbooked and you have to fly standby.  “But half the plane is empty!” I screamed.  I realized I basically paid the $400 to have the option to buy a seat for $65.  This is just plain criminal!

I made sure I arrived to the airport early so I could secure a seat, and went up to the ticketing agent.  I showed her my Departure Management Card, and she said that I had to proceed to the gate.  Here’s our dialogue—this is verbatim:

“Why don’t I have a boarding pass?” I asked.

“Because NO airline guarantees seats,” she snapped.

“But what did I pay $400 for then?” I asked, clearly confused.

“For a space on the plane,” she answered, even more frustrated.  “Space, but not a seat.”

“So I will definitely be able to get on the plane?”  I wanted to confirm this.

“Yes.  NO airline guarantees seats, so please stop questioning our policies.” 

She then looked down at my bag.  “You’re going to have to check that bag … please bring it over here” as she motions to the scale.

“No I don’t,” I reply.  “It’s a normal carry-on size bag.”

“No, it’s too big. If you don’t check it, you’ll go through security, get to the gate, and then they’ll tell you that you have to check it.  Then you have to come all the way back here and you’ll miss your flight.”

“OK, I’ll take my chances,” I respond, well knowing that this is the same carry-on bag I’ve been using for 6 years.

“You’ve been WARNED!” she screams.  I just laugh out loud and walk toward security.

This is a picture of my bag, taken with my Blackberry.  Seems like a fairly nondescript carry-on bag to me.

Thankfully the security line wasn’t that long, so it was only about 5 minutes before I was up to the TSA agent.  There were just a couple people in front of me, and a lady in plain clothes approaches me and asks to see my boarding pass.  I looked at her and asked, “Who are you?”  She said, “Never mind that, tell me your name and let me see your boarding pass.”

At this point, I’m up to the TSA agent and I ask him who this lady is and whether or not I need to show her my boarding pass.  He responded that I better do as the lady asks, “or else.”  Now noticing the sloppily-placed United nametag on this lady, I hand her my boarding pass.  She looks at it and says, “Sir, you’re going to need to check that bag.”  At this point VERY frustrated, I ask, “What the hell is this about?!”

She responds, telling me that the bag is too big to be carried on and that I need to check it.  She also tells me that she received a call because I cussed out the ticketing agent.  I did no such thing!  That spiteful lady didn’t like having her authority questioned, so she had the audacity to lie and hold me up in security.

This United lady and I went back and forth for 10 minutes, and eventually she let me go, but also saying that the gate agent was going to require me to check my bag and that I’d miss my flight.  This was nothing short of harassment.  Was I being discriminated against because I was white?  Male?  I do have a Hebrew last name, so was this anti-Semitism???

I go through security just fine (the bag has NO problem going through the x-ray machine) and proceed to the gate.  There I find a friend of mine who says, “Hey!  They’ve been calling your name on the PA system for 10 minutes!”

to be continued…

.

Inspiration for Recording Telephone Conversations

I recently came across this Failblog video and found it just too funny.  If you ever needed a reason to record your calls to customer service agents, here it is:



I have recently begun recording some conversations myself and will look forward to sharing those.  (By the way, while I respect and love all readers, if you don't "get" the video, I'd have to recommend you spend less time at Doubt of Business and more time here.)

.

Beware the "Maximum Refund Guarantee"

(H&R Block in Particular)

It's tax season, and as you're probably aware, all the DIY tax programs attempt to distinguish themselves by offering a "maximum refund guarantee." If you read the fine print, there are some things you should be weary of:

• The "guarantee" only applies to the cost of the tax preparation software, not any difference in the tax refund or liability. 
• In most cases, you can only have your money refunded if you've already filed the taxes. 
• To actually ensure that you're getting your maximum refund, you have to effectively do your taxes twice, using at least 2 different preparation software programs. Who does this? 

I do. Yes, I completed my taxes on both H&R Block and TurboTax's website. I started with H&R Block, but when the refund calculator kept doing funny things, I decided to input all the data again into TurboTax. I was vindicated to find a $1,200 difference between the two programs!

I've been filing my taxes with H&R Block online for almost 10 years, so I called to inform them of the $1,000 discrepancy. The first time I called, it took me over 15 minutes to speak to a human, who asked me all the security questions. I was relieved when she also asked me my phone number so that she could call me back in case we got disconnected. I gave it to her, and within a few seconds of me explaining my issue, we got disconnected. I waited patiently by the phone for her to call back, but to no avail.

I then called again, and able to maneuver through the phone menus more efficiently, I got a human in just 5 minutes. Before she even began to ask me the security questions, we got disconnected a second time!

The third time I called, I was livid, but was successfully able to reach and speak to a human customer service rep. When I told her that TurboTax was offering a $1,200 higher refund, she asked me what she could do about it. Not really sure of how or why I was supposed to answer that question, I suggested that (1) I be refunded the $60 tax preparation fee, and (2) I speak to a tax advisor who could find the source of the discrepancy.

She then put me on hold for 35 minutes, after which she reluctantly refunded the $60 tax preparation fee. But she did say that I would have to pay the $79 fee to speak to a tax advisor.

A fitting end to the event, I received THREE email customer satisfaction surveys – including two for each of the times I was disconnected.

Bottom line is, if you want to ensure a maximum refund, you better do your taxes twice. You can’t make this stuff up!


.

Borders Update

Well, Borders officially filed for bankruptcy the other day, and I found this line amusing from an article in today's Wall Street Journal:

"Chief Financial Officer Scott Henry said in the court documents filed Wednesday that Borders aims to stay viable by enhancing its customer rewards program..."

I have an idea, Scott.  Don't "discourage" your customers from becoming Rewards members!
.

Border's "Rewards"

I've been considering starting this blog for several months now, and with the impending bankruptcy of Border's, I figured there would be no better time to start than now.

If you haven't heard, Border's is preparing to enter Chapter 11 pretty soon.  This news was of no surprise to me after a recent visit to Borders in early January.  I frequently check for great online deals at http://slickdeals.net and came across a "50% off" coupon for Border's.  This coupon was available to anyone directly from the Border's website.  It required a Border's Rewards membership, but membership is free and you can sign up anytime.

The only thing I've been rewarded as a Borders Rewards member
is daily email spamming.

Because my in-laws were coming into town, I printed out 4 coupons so we could each treat ourselves to a fairly priced book.  (I say "fairly priced" since Border's books at 50% off is about equal to what you'd pay on Amazon.com.  Also, generally speaking, you should steer clear of the DVD section of Border's -- their DVDs are priced 2-3 times what you would pay on Amazon.)

After church, my in-laws, wife, and I ventured to the Border's in Chapel Hill.  My father-in-law was the first to find a book to his liking.  With book and coupon in hand, he approached the cashier who promptly informed him that in order to use the coupon, he already needed to be a Rewards member.  "Besides," she said, "that coupon was emailed out to particular Rewards members."

After hearing this news, I kindly but firmly approached the cashier and informed her that the coupon was in fact printed directly off the Border's website.  My father-in-law wasn't a Border's Rewards member, but I asked her what stopped him from signing up and then using the coupon.  Her response and exact words were, "We discourage that."  "You discourage people from using your coupons?" I replied.  After some more back and forth, she hesitantly responded, "well, I guess we can make an exception here ... but just this once."

My wife, father-in-law, and I ended up buying books (i.e., handing cash to Border's), but my mother-in-law was turned off and decided not to buy anything.  She's clearly not the minority: since Border's is filing for bankruptcy, many others like her have decided not to hand their cash over to Border's.

The overall ridiculousness was Border's alleged policy of discouraging customers from using their own coupons.  I'm not sure what's worse, providing a coupon which encourages customers to come in, and then not honor it, or providing a coupon with so much fine print you literally can't buy anything.  Case in point would be a common Sports Authority coupon: 25% off sounds like a great deal.  But when you read the exclusions in the fine print, there is literally nothing for you to buy!

Coupons should follow a general rule of thumb:
The fine print should not take up more space on a coupon than the coupon itself!

You can't make this stuff up!

.