Why do AT&T service representatives refuse to identify themselves?

[shance]

Of course we know the answer, is that they don't want any traceable accountability and/or "paper trail" for any and all violations they may commit. When you're talking to a John or Susan, it's hard to retrace who you specifically were talking with. In addition, there's no service number or confirmation number so you can retrace your phone conversation either. In other words, AT&T allows no traceable way, short of recording all the conversations with them, which keeps them wholly immune to the wealth of mistakes/fraud they may commit.

Today I spoke with a rep because my main phone line has been down for two weeks. This is not the first time my land line has died.

I ask the representative for his last name, which he along with other reps I have spoken to have said, they are not required/allowed to give their last name.

I then asked him for his ID number because all customer reps are required to have one. However, the rep responded by saying they are not required by law to identify themselves other than by their first name, and of course that could be John or Kathy.

If this is true, then there is no oversight of, or accountability of, their customer service reps at AT&T which means every transaction they make and they take could be untraceable and merged into one lovely unaccountable, beaurocratic whirlpool of convenient "incompetence" (the word of the day*).

It's time to fight back against the Big Brother phone company, which appears to more than obviously be in cahoots with the spying agencies, and it is clear AT&T has been allowing them to spy, record and receive any and all of our personal/private conversations and information and there is no accountability and no worries at all for being prosecuted for breaking the law.

[Horse with no Name]

1. I have Valor Telecom

All of their employees give you their numbers before speaking to them regarding your account. I don't believe they outsource either--most of the time I talk to someone in New Mexico.
I like that.

[gristy]

2. You want service from the telephone company?!

"We don't care. We don't have to. (snort) We're the Phone Company!"

[LittleClarkie]

12. Your picture didn't turn out, but I'd know that quote anywhere

She did that for SNL, didn't she?

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

19. She launched it on Laugh-In

AT&T is a great steaming pile of incompetence and indifference to customer satisfaction. Over the past five years I had cancelled all ATT services because of their inability to do anything right, only to have my landline phone service hijacked in the SBC merger. I will be switching to a new provider before the year is out.

[LittleClarkie]

31. I know. I'm old enough to remember, sadly. But that particular line

was in something she filmed for SNL.

I use that line alot, substituting the monothiths in my life for AT&T. Usually UPS, because they don't care, they don't have to, they're UPS. If they fail to deliver your package, you can involk your guarantee, but that just means they have to refund your $5. Whoopie.

[RoyGBiv]

3. Not to defend AT&T ...

Because your beef is with AT&T, not the rep. Reps don't give last names for a very good reason. It can and does lead to harassment, at best, physical harm at worst. And when I say "harassment" I don't mean the kind where you call up their boss and tell him or her what a crappy job that person is doing. I mean, call you at home in the middle of the night and threaten to blow your head off type of harassment. It's happened to me, more than once, when I let down my guard and gave a person I was trying to help with a billing issue my last name. (Had some asshat show up any my HOUSE at 3am pounding on the friggin' door because the service my company provides had gone down, and he knew who I was. Looked in the phone book and found where I lived.) I do not work for AT&T nor a call center of any variety, but I've worked in some form of customer service all my working life, and I could tell you horror stories. There is simply no way for a rep to know whether you can be trusted. If you happen to be mad at the time, justifiable or not, they tend to be less trusting. In fact the most normal-seeming people often turn out to be the psychopaths who spend every waking moment trying to find one more way to make your life hell because the company they slave for screwed you over.

Also, you're not quite correct on this. When a call-center rep touches your account, they leave a fingerprint that lets their superiors know who they were. This is required for federal auditing purposes for any communications company that offers telephone service. This is standard operating procedure in call-centers because, again believe it or not, accountability for handling calls is a major part of that rep's evaluation. The little recording telling you "calls may be monitored" is also telling you the truth. It's largely random, unless a particular rep is under suspicion for something or other, but it's there.

Having said all that, if your phone line has been down that long, with that many repeated problems, and if you have been unable to get a supervisor on the phone when you call in, you need to report the problem to whatever agency serves as your local watchdog for the company. If all else fails, which it shouldn't, go to the FCC. They have a complaint line, but I can't remember the number at the moment. Federal regulations require telephone service companies to maintain in excess of a 99.9% network reliability rate except in cases of natural disaster else risk heavy fines (hundreds of thousands of dollars). This does not of course mean any individual customer has to experience this rate, rather this is the performance level required overall. Reports of unsolved issues is one way the FCC and your local regulatory agencies have of monitoring this.

[WhereIsMyFreedom]

6. I can understand the dangers

But that is why they have employee numbers to give out in lieu of their full names. Many companies require their representative to give their ID, at least if asked. It seems irresponsible of AT&T to not have a policy like that.

I've generally been happier with cell phone service than with land line service for awhile now, which is why I ditched our land line. Many of the family plans split five ways among friends and family is cheaper than a land line anyway. Of course, not everyone has good service in their homes.

[REP]

8. Not Irresponsible

I'm no fan of SBC/ATT, but that's on policy that makes sense. Say you get an ID number - and you have your friend of a friend who works there look up who it belongs to. There are too many people with access to the information for giving out IDs to make sense.

[RoyGBiv]

11. Exactly so ...

Not sure how it is with companies that actually do give out real ID numbers. I have a number I give out if the customer insists upon it, but it's a dummy number essentially that identifies my building.

[REP]

14. They're Either Meaningless or Assigned for that Purpose

My ID number contained part of my Social Security Number - sure I'll be handing that out! Every now and then a customer would call and use a fake ID# and claim to be a CSR to get 'special treatment' (yeah, right) but that never worked out like they thought it would.

[RoyGBiv]

10. The Employee #

The only reason companies have that policy is to allow reps to give the customer something that doesn't mean anything, which doesn't really address the problem. It actually just leaves the customer with the false impression they've accomplished something because they've talked to someone they supposedly can identify. But, as noted, if that employee touched the account, the employee *can* be identified, just not immediately to the customer.

FWIW, I personally can't give you my actual employee-ID to anyone because it also serves as one-half of the equation of getting into secured areas of my building. I can actually be fired for this, one of the few offenses that bypasses the standard, progressive disciplinary measures.

Not trying to make a big deal out of this, but I find these kinds of complaints frustrating. I understand them, because the company itself creates the problem, but it's still frustrating. A call-center rep can't truly fix the problem. They have procedures they go through to get technical issues into the hands of people who can fix the problem, but the customer will never talk to those people. When the issue doesn't get fixed it may well be because the rep didn't follow the proper procedures, but that will be discovered and either corrected or result in the rep losing his or her job. As noted, companies can be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for network downtime if it goes on too long. What happens more often is that the issue is a complex one, and if it is a result of a failure with the company's procedures, that problem has occurred somewhere well down the line of the customer-contact rep.

[conflictgirl]

13. But identifying the individual employee will not solve the problem

As I said in my post below, the problem with the phone company is not at the individual representative level. You could have the name, birthdate, social security number and address of the rep you talk to, and you still wouldn't get any better service. You might be able to get the rep fired, because they fire employees for ridiculous things (my husband quit before getting fired, but they wrote him up for all sorts of unreasonable stuff - like missing a half-day to be with me for a scheduled C-section - and he constantly feared his job was in jeopardy) - but you know what? Even if you get that rep fired, you're not likely to get better service unless that rep was being rude or unprofessional.

You don't need to know that information about the representative, any more than you need to know the last name of the person working behind the counter at 7-11. The phone company *does* record the calls (and informs you that they'll do so), so there is a verifiable trial. The problem is the bureaucracy of having different departments serving different functions - AND the fact that they, like many/most other companies, are cutting back on staff to save $$ and that also decreases the quality of service you'll get. Again, the problem is not usually with the reps, and knowing their last name or an ID number will not solve the problems anyway. If someone chooses to keep a land line, they would do a lot better to write a letter to company executives about the poor quality of service. Its an industry-wide problem (I say that also as a former Sprint employee) and it's going to take a LOT to solve it.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

20. I agree, and I rarely fault the representative

The reps don't set policy and I never take out my frustration on them. Except in one case involving Chase Bank, where one rep's error made a mess of my account and another rep was insufferably rude about it.

I have resorted to written communication many times in dealing with communications and financial companies, always copying the correspondence as high up the chain of command as I can find addresses to send it. It has resulted in satisfactory resolution in all but one instance, in which I eventually had to contact the regulatory agency and threaten the provider with legal action. Writing letters is a pain and many people don't bother. That's why companies respond to them - they know you have to be pretty pissed off to go that far.

Many people just take out it on the poor rep, who is the least powerful person in the equation.

[REP]

7. You Win the Ceegar

Every time an account is accessed, even if the CSR doesn't note it (which is unlikely, since it is against policy to open an account without noting it, even if the note is that it was opened in error), it is 'tagged' with information that indentifies whoch CSR accesses the account.

As for the "calls may be monitored," there's two types - line testing, which calls are sampled randomly for brief moments, and training/development, where the entire contact is listened in on but not recorded (and verbatim notes may not be taken) to evaluate how well the CSR is performing, focusing on courtesy and sales.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

17. just a recording note

there are all sorts of recording capabilities that companies use to monitor the activities of their reps and their customers. Primarily they fall into a few categories :

1) Line testing (generally for physical line testing...not usually tested for voice)
2) Live Monitoring (where a supervisor or manager listens in on an active conversation for whatever time period they see fit)
3) Quality Monitoring (where a selective number of calls are recorded in their entirety for evaluation and training purposes)
4) Compliance Recording (where a voice transaction is occuring and 100% of the calls of this nature legally must be recorded...Banking, Healthcare and the like)

The thing is, the company that owns the lines to which you are calling may record your conversation with one of their employees for any reason they see fit and at any rate they see fit, up to and including recording 100% of the calls that come in. In fact, in the vast majority of the US, you as a customer have no right to NOT be recorded.

In most of the customer service world where actual transactions are taking place over the phone such as ordering a product or service or making a payment of some sort the entire call will likely be recorded or at the very least the portion of the call where the transaction is verified.

If you do a good job of documenting to whom you have spoken (and sometimes a first name is sufficient) and when you called (heck, get the physical extension # of the rep's phone if you can) the call can be found in the recording system.

subjectProdigal

[REP]

21. Those Rules Don't Apply to LECs

They cannot record conversations, or even make verbatim notes of them is they are monitored. If you ask if your call is being monitored, the person monitoring must identify themselves. Customer calls *cannot* be recorded. Trust me on this. I still have nightmares about this crap.

The rules may be different for different industries, but what I said is correct for LECs. And yes, they do monitor voice for line testing.

Outgoing and incoming calls are, to a certain extent, recorded - the incoming and outgoing numbers, but not conversations. That information is usually held 24-48 hours (things may have changed) unless a subpeona is issued for particular records. A customer cannot request their own local usage details unless they have subpeona. Well, they can request, but they won't get them without one. Those are the records being handed over.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

23. then why does the company I work for

sell millions of dollars of contact center recording solutions to the likes of SBC and Verizon (and yes, AT&T)???

D

[REP]

41. SBC *Is* AT&T

Thank you, drive through.

Friend, I KNOW the tariffs. You "know" what your company sells (although not who its cutomers are). If it makes you feel better, believe you are right - but you're not.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

45. err...uh...

Not up until recently were the two...one. So forgive me for mentioning them separately...your self-righteousness is telling. You can tell me you know the tariffs...but, apparently your knowledge of them is slightly off... or perhaps you are misinterpretting something or may you and I are just having a terminology issue. The fact of the matter is that I have INSTALLED (physically connected the cables and mounted the recorders in the racks) and configured for 100% recording for trunk and extension side recording. So, keep telling me what you KNOW. I have pulled the cables...have YOU seen the recorders? Have you helped configure the pipes on the T's? Have you replayed calls to verify that config? Have you taught supervisors and managers how to use the interface to find the calls they need info on and play them back and even perform quality evaluations? I thought not...

I have...so belief is a matter of physical interaction with the components you 'say' they don't use...but then again, maybe they ripped it all out after I left...yeah...that makes sense...

subjectProdigal

[ProdigalJunkMail]

50. So, no reply

I guess maybe you cannot answer my questions as to whether or not you have actually done these things. Have you? Did AT&T (and SBC) just tear the recorders out when I left?

Hmmmm...tariffs...know them well...

sP

[shance]

24. It doesn't have to be their real name, however in order to have

accountability, if you talk to someone but and it winds up being your word against theirs, AND you have no way to identify or trace back to who you were speaking, then the companie and their employees can essentially treat us in whatever manner they please and we have no recourse.

[RoyGBiv]

30. As noted ...

When any employee of the company touches your account, their name becomes associated with it. You do have recourse. You simply need to move beyond the individual rep, who has no power at all, and to supervisory levels and eventually government regulatory agencies if you cannot be satisfied by the company. If it turns into a legal matter, such as you're paying for service you are not getting and without reasonable attempts to fix the problem, records from your account can be subject to subpoena by the regulatory agencies, including the names of those who accessed your account.

This happens every single day. They key to getting what you want is to avoid getting frustrated to the point it clouds your judgment. Remain calm, make demands, talk to someone other than a front-line rep.

[Stryguy]

4. VOIP

My Voice Over IP telephone hasn't seen the downtime you're experiencing with your landline. I know this is a bit off topic but I say drop the landline and go VOIP.

No one will be calling you trying to sell additional services either. That's what made me pull the trigger. 5 times I was called asking if I wanted Caller ID and other "services". I kept saying NO but eventually it showed up on my bill regardless.

[REP]

5. I Can Answer With Authority

CSRs are not required to give their last names because they must list their names in the phone book. While the vast majority of customers realize that the CSR on the phone did not cause the disruption in service due to either weather or the customer's refusal to pay the bill, every now and then, one reacts badly and comes into the office with a knife or a gun - or drives a truck into the building. If the CSR gave out personal information, those deranged customers could just as easily show up at their homes.

This is the real reason. I was there the day the nutcase showed up with the knife because some idiot in St Louis gave out physical address (also a no-no) and the day one showed up with a gun. It has nothing to with "accountability" - the schmoe on the phone is the LAST person who has any real power to address why the physical phone line is out. They don't have to give their last names or employee number to anyone, ever, for any reason and if you use threatening and/or abusive language, they can terminate the call. Not a single one of them is being paid enough to put up with that bullshit.

[shance]

25. You have got to be kidding. They have access to all our information and

what if they decide to come visit us for whatever reason. They have all our information and their are "nutcases" that work at phone companies too.

Your intention to blame those who are at the mercy of the phone companies is such a stretch and there is so much more evidence on customers being abused than the other way around. I hear repeatedly from friends their "experiences with SBC or AT&T and the terribile service and/or rude, and in some cases dishonest service coming from what is now, the AT&T monopoly.

[RoyGBiv]

29. Define abuse...

Has an SBC/ATT rep actually come to your house in the middle of the night to scream at you and threaten your life? Have you been literally spit on. Has anyone ever jumped at you from behind a parked car and grabbed you by the neck, throwing you to the ground and demanded you turn the f-ing phone back on right f-ing now (even though they owe several hundred dollars) or die?

I think a little perspective on what constitutes abuse is in order here.

I fully understand your frustration, but you're going about trying to solve it entirely incorrectly, and you're blaming the wrong people. That person on the phone is a working stiff just like you just trying to do his or her job and has no personal vendetta against you in the slightest. You need to speak with a supervisor, preferably a technical supervisor. Don't get off the phone until you have. Don't get off the phone with the supervisor until you have said everything you want to say and have received enough information to satisfy you on some level that the problem is in the process of being corrected. If it's not corrected soon, change companies.

[REP]

43. Let's Be Logical

First, if employees went after every annoying customer in person, they'd never have time to show up for work.

Second, if an employee did go after an annoying customer, it'd be real easy to catch and prosecute that employee.

Third, no customer is worth it.

This reminds me very much of a typical call:

"You goddamned fucking whore bitch! Where is page 3 of my bill? You stole it, you fucking bitch! I now where you are and I'm going to fucking kill you!"

"Sir? Do you have page 2? Can you tell me what's on the back of page 2?"

-Click-

Yes, I want to visit this gentleman - don't you?

[RoyGBiv]

47. LOL!!!

I call the guy that sits next to me the Page 2 guy. He's been working with this stuff for so long that he has developed predictable responses to various problems, and when I hear him mention "Page 2" I know he has an idiot on his hands.

Situation:

"I'm not paying that late fee. You didn't put a due date on the bill. You never put a due date on the bill. How am I supposed to know when it's due when you don't put a due date on it ..."

(I think one would assume after having service for 47 days, the length of time it takes for a late fee to show up, that one would assume a bill might be due by then.)

"Sir, if you'll turn to page two ..."

And in BIG, BOLD characters taking up a third of the page: DUE BY : <date>

Every other bit of information our customers typically claim they never get is also on Page 2. On Page One are these words, "Turn to Page 2 of your bill for explanations of fees, due dates ..."

It's a riot.

[conflictgirl]

9. Security risk for the employees

My husband used to work for SBC (before they became AT&T) as one of the telephone customer service reps and the reason he wasn't allowed to give out his last name was for security reasons. Sometimes extremely irate people would call, and some of them were even threatening violence if things weren't going their way. Now, I am no fan of SBC/AT&T *at all* and neither is my husband, they were a shitty company to work for, and I am personally aware of how many things they screw up. But sometimes my husband would have to tell people that, no, he couldn't restore their DSL internet today because they owe $800 in unpaid charges (that's not even an exaggeration) and the caller would then threaten HIM.

There are only a few towns in our state that have call centers for the phone company and it wouldn't be that hard to narrow them down. For my family's protection, I'm damn glad he wasn't required to give out his last name to the callers who were threatening him with violence because they didn't like the answers he gave. The REAL reason shit doesn't get done when you call the phone company is because the call center's structure is bureaucratic and things always get lost on their way from one department to another. My husband told me that he was really concerned that problems got resolved when customers were frustrated because the company had somehow screwed them over, and there were numerous times when his hands were tied because the department that was supposed to fix the problem wouldn't respond to his repeated requests and he didn't have the power to fix it himself.

There is absolutely no conspiracy here, and knowing the phone representative's last name isn't going to get you any better service. Knowing the employee's ID number could also be a risk since the same number is used to access employee benefits and payroll. The reps aren't spying on you either. Trust me, when they have bosses writing them up for spending twenty seconds too long on a call (which happened to my husband), they don't have time to be plotting against the customer.

The phone company is fucked up, no question. But it's not the "little guy" answering the phone that's your problem, it's the bureaucracy.

[LittleClarkie]

15. Let me get this straight

The phone company is part of some vast right wing conspiracy because you got what you considered lousy customer service?

Do you have knowledge of the technology being used in these wire taps or anything to base such accusations on except that you're pissed off at them at the moment?

[shance]

27. Its really touching to witness your love for AT&T and their lack

of accountability for their service, and their apparent contribution to the spying.

Call me sentimental, but I like those qualities that represent respect, freedom and my rights as an American and a citizen.

[LittleClarkie]

32. No love here

But no tinfoil either.

If I get crappy service, I'm not ready to label the customer service rep or the company criminals. Just a tad over the top.

And others in this thread have explained why they likely won't give you their last name. It's for their protection against kooks.

[conflictgirl]

35. That's fuzzy math

Saying that the phone company isn't conspiring against you does not equal thinking the phone company is great. There's a lot wrong with them and it's LEGAL. Fight to change that instead of blaming the lowest and least powerful rung of the corporate ladder.

[jerry611]

16. Actually the law is to protect the employee

It is actually illegal for AT&T to force their reps to give anything more than their first name for security reasons. There is also liability issues.

And you actually expect a telephone company to give you excellent customer service?? You havnt been around much, have you?
Getting good customer service is exceptionally rare these days at any business, but your utility companies will always be the worst. They will treat you like crap.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

18. yes...AT&T does record their calls

not all of them, but a goodly number and most if not all where transactions are taking place. See post #17...

sP

[REP]

22. No, They Do Not

Unless they're violating more tariffs than usual, of course...

[ProdigalJunkMail]

34. please see post #23 and help

me understand how your authority to answer these questions seem to conflict with our sales numbers.

Thanks,
sP

[Touchdown]

36. AT&T's union would like to know about them

...because performance monitoring is for improvement and to be destroyed after a period of time. If you have some recorded calls, then that's a violation of the contract.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

40. AT&T know full well as does their union

yes, they are erased after a period of time...less than 90 days in most cases...however, calls for the ordering of or changing of service as well as payments by phone are recorded and maintained for much longer (I believe it is three years). These calls are not kept for quality purposes rather for dispute handling.

sP

[REP]

42. Damn Straight

The poster who said he knows about the recording is an employee in another industry, and is not aware of the rule governing LECs - or that SBC is ATT!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

51. tell, me, what industry am I in?

and tell me just WHEN SBC and AT&T merged. Was it recently? Yeah...it WAS. So, tell people what you think I know. I put the recorders in the call centers (at least some of them)...some were for AT&T and some were for SBC...but you can be picky and say that they are now one in the same...they were not when I did the installs.

You can say you know the tariffs...but you can't tell me they don't record. Because I have set the recorders in the racks and I have heard the voices. I have set up storage for long term archiving of calls...terabytes of the stuff. Your interpretation of the rule is crap...or maybe the union reps that I worked with to design scorecards for the CSR's was a fraud or maybe they were unaware of your tariffs? Nah, I know. They didn't understand that the voices they heard when filling out the scorecards was a recording...yeah, that could be it... :sarcasm:

Answer my questions about how I could have installed them...maybe I am just delusional...yeah...I dreamed it.'

subjectProdigal

[seabeyond]

26. they hung up on me twice. they make mistake on my bill.

disconnect me. when i am trying to fix it in frustration, because i have no where locally to go to show them they applied the wrong number off my check to my bill, they hung up on me. told me they didnt have to listen to my frustration and hung up on me. their mistake. i am trying to pay, and fix, and they hung up on me and told me to call back another time. after a half hour trying to pay thru computer then waiting for a live person, they hung up on me.

assholes. this was the first month that they took over southwestern bell they fucked up my account. i still havent figured out where or how to get the bill fixed. i just paid again to get phone connected.

[REP]

44. Get and Front and Back Copy of the Cancelled Check

When you have that, call back. Tell them a payment was applied to the wrong account. Tell them you have the cancelled check with you. The CSR will tell you where to look for the numbers the CSR needs to track the payment. Do not swear at the CSR or call him/her names - they are allowed to disconnect the call when abusive language is used. If you cannot find the numbers, the CSR will tell you where to mail the copy of the check.

If your phone has been disconnected, each time it is reconnected, it may have a different account number even though your phone number is the same. The payment might have been applied to an old account in your name that had a balance owed on it.

[seabeyond]

46. i dont swear, adn might be impatient, but not even at them

more about the situation and the frustration of having to solve a problem, they created, yet i have no face to face available to me and dependent on them to correct. right there got me a hang up. what i just said to you. the second hang up was when i told the girl the problem, she said let me give a fax #. i say thank you i so appreciate it, last call was so frustrating when i wnated to take care of error. she hung up on that.

i called back immediately and got a person to take payment and told her situation but that i was afraid she would hang up too just saying this. she looked and saw i had made a call and receiver of call did not put in name to identify who hung up on me.

i am nto a mean ugly rude person...... they are out of control

thank you for info, it was a check for like 186 dollars, they applied 84. made no sense. it is the challenge of getting fax number, then i haev to learn how to use a damn fax machine and then be dependent on them take the charges off my account for disconnecting when it should not have been.

do you see the challenge. and all te while, not sitting across from someone correcting all their assumption and continually explaining until they get it, and do it, and i see they do it.

already have spent a couple hours on this with no result. how many more hours, with iffy on result. hence me saying this would warrant another hang up

[RoyGBiv]

48. FWIW ...

A check for 186 interpreted as 84 is more typical than you might expect. A lot of people's 6's look like 4's, or can, and 1's are easy to miss. The problem is that with checks, you've got to have someone see the physical check, and the people that do this do too much of it. (Understaffed, underpaid.) It can make your vision blur. That's not an excuse, just a reason. Another typical problem is hand cramp, which can result in a person not pressing the first key in a number sequence hard enough for it to register, and can also cause a weird sort of dyslexia with the signals to the fingers. Four and six are on the same row of a key pad, and it's not uncommon to accidentally press the 4 when you mean to press the 6, or vice versa. Again, not an excuse, just a reason.

And, yes, it is frustrating that there's no one you can see face to face. The problem you're having I could have fixed in 5 minutes if you were to come to my office with the canceled check copy.

I work in one of the few businesses left that have face to face customer service agents, and I feel like I'm fighting for my job every quarter. Management never says anything directly, but they're always looking for ways to maintain profit margins without raising prices, and two things are always in consideration for the chopping block: security and individual customer service agents. Maintaining a storefront is vastly more expensive than a call center, so even though I get paid the same as someone who does my job in a call center, it actually costs the company about twice as much overall to maintain me as an employee. I mention this only as a suggestion: if you are a customer of a company that does maintain a storefront presence, stay with them even though it may cost you a couple dollars more a month to do so. Otherwise they'll take the hint of their competitors who get all the customers because of a lower rate but don't bother with something like offering quality customer service. My company takes that seriously and so offers several places customers can go and talk face-to-face...but they've stopped doing that for business clients and have closed half the stores we once had. And I'm always looking at the classifieds for different opportunities because I don't expect my job to last past the lease agreement period on the building where I am.

[seabeyond]

49. i couldnt agree with you more. to have a store front is well

worth it to me. and paying the extra money. but i had problems with at&t way back when we bought a business 3/4 years ago. had them as long distance. they were charging for 24 lines. we had 8 lines. i called them on the bullshit and refused to pay, stopped using them and they never came back for the money we owed. they knew they were stealing and had been with the old company for quite sometime. they were just not called on it.

also, clearly my check was written not to mention the part one hundred eighty six dollars and ....... but i see your point on how error can happen. tobe honest in massive years of payng to telephone company i never had such error. until the first month at&t took over

but i agree, i will give more to a company i can walk into though that isnt needed. paying more. ocx will do phone, we have them with cable and computer, and i can walk into an office here. just gonna be a mess changing over because of so many variables. i am a business owner and customer service has always been a way for me to maintain customers even with a tad bit of higher price. i can appreciate the business aspect of it.

thanks for your post

[Touchdown]

28. Which number did you call?

1-800-222-0300?

Those are unionized, American workers, and at least 9 years ago when I worked there, we were required to give both our first and last names first before we asked how we can help.

I know that there are offshoot products with different service centers, such as wireless, Worldnet isp, etc. but I worked for the core long distance arm, with the Reach Out plans and the True USA savings crap.

Now that SBC has taken over, the rules for name announcements might have changed, so I don't know anymore. You could have also called India, and I know that SBC and AT&T both outsourced a number of account rep jobs in the past. Those are not AT&T employees, but subcontractors who have different rules, as they recieve paychecks from a different employer. They only work on behalf of AT&T.

I'd consider it a red flag if they refuse to give their full name that you're not speaking to an actual AT&T employee.

BTW: We have no service numbers, and never have. Don't know where you got that. All we have are HR IDs, which is none of your business. Our full names though, that is.

[Horse with no Name]

33. My Mother in law worked for SBC

for manyyyyyy years--even before the breakup--in Directory Assistance.It was when they actually had live operators in Midland.Her name is a little bit odd.
I will never forget one time I called directory and got her.
Even after I identified myself she hurried me off the phone.
Told me later they had a certain amount of time to complete each request.
So, I always wonder now if the operators NOW have that same time frame so half of the time will say they cannot find a number that you know exists.
Nothing makes me angrier than to be told that there isn't a listing--especially for a business. Then I call back and it is there.

[Touchdown]

38. I do not envy operators.

There's something very paternalistic about having to post a little flag on your desk if you have to go to the bathroom. I'm a tech. I take breaks whenever I feel like it.

At 20-40 calls a minute, you'd have a lot of typos too. I think that's the breaks of being an operator. You just can't win.

Oh OP: I checked with our Union VP, and a greivance that went to arbitration eventually banned the requirement of giving out last names on customer service calls. The company relented when something like described above (somebody finding a rep's house in the phone book, and paying a visit) happened. It wasn't an AT&T rep, but it apparently happened quite often enough to change the policy.

[SoCalDem]

37. Ask for a supervisor, and record the call?...n/t

[Touchdown]

39. On the spying thing.

It may not be so simple. I asked around.

The Telecom act of 1963, and 1996 compels telecom companies to cooperate with national security officials when a warrant is presented. There is no choice in the matter.

The question remains.
We know Bush never got warrants, but did they fake some and present those fakes to the phone companies?
It could be very possible that Dave Dorman (previous CEO of AT&T Corp, SBC & AT&T is AT&T Inc.) willingly allowed the spying to take place, since he's a repuke.

A single lawsuit doesn't make it "obviously". Ever heard of getting a day in court? The allegations may be true, but between the Telecom Act and the 4th Amendment, I'd say AT&T is stuck in a no-win situation. They either had to do it because the government said so (we have wire snips and crimpers. They have guns), or AT&T is guilty of conspiring.

[Rex]

52. AT&T is a branch of the NSA

They don't like to give names either.