I felt the joys of being a customer service representative tonight. There's nothing quite like arrogant, irate caller just before you're about to leave for the evening. Now, I'll be the first to admit that I think some of the policies in practice are inconvenient to our customers. I totally expect the calls of frustration due to those policies. However, I also know that I'm not in the position to accept the liability of easing those policies and since they don't hurt anyone I don't feel obligated to really change it. Also, I take stock in our free market system. No one is forced to do business with us or our affiliates. If you don't like our policies, you have the ability to go somewhere else.
Yes, I do anticipate calls of frustrated cardholders and I understand why they are frustrated. I wish I could do more for them. The majority of people I speak with understand that. They realize that I'm powerless. Even those who initially start out as jerks eventually realize that I am doing everything I can to assist them and back off. Sure it would be great if they weren't jerks at all but people always seem to think that if you're an asshole, you'll get what you want. Sometimes this is true but there are just as many times that they don't get what they want, they realize that I can give them what they want, and they are still an asshat.
Take my favorite "outraged" caller of the evening who thought it would surprise me to know that he owned five houses in Michigan. It didn't. He also made sure to let me know that he is a judge and that his wife is a college professor but again but none of that matters. He could own the state of Michigan and I won't do anything that might cost me my job. He might be wealthy; however, I speak to people who own multiple thriving and well-known businesses on a daily basis. They don't attempt to prove their monetary worth to me because they know their worth and they also know how to get what they want. It's part of the reason they are so successful. I find that people say things to indicate how rich and powerful they are, it probably means they're not all that rich or powerful.
I so wanted to say to him, "you are so not as special as you think you are" but that would've cost me my job. I am more than happy to write a detailed letter to my supervisors and contacts at the bank making sure to quote his statements of "outrage." I will gladly share that he threatens to sue us over the emotional distress of his wife whose card was declined at Mr. Wahoo's restaurant (first world problems, anyone?). I will be sure to let them know that he plans to tell everyone he knows or that he want us to write a letter to Mr. Wahoo's explaining why he was declined (as if they actually care). I will certainly provide them his office phone number and will be sure to note that they say, " May I please speak to Judge X if he's not on the bench dealing with real criminals."
Maybe they'll be able to do more for you as they are the ones with the actual power to make changes. After the way he talked to me though, a part of me sincerely hopes that they tell him to buzz off. Judging from his modest credit line, I strongly doubt that it will cripple his financial institution if he chooses to take his business elsewhere. Maybe he can write a song about how we declined his card and embarrassed his wife; I would love to see a 40 something singing judge on Youtube. It worked for Dave Carroll when United broke his guitar. Maybe it will work for him too. By all means, he should go for it. Yelling at a customer service representative for twenty minutes probably is not anyone's best course of action if they actually want anything to change.
I did everything I could to try and appease him. I know I won't lose my job because he was unhappy. I just hope I don't get reprimanded for being a bit snarky in my attempts to tolerate him. I can't worry about that now. I have the next two days off and I plan to forget about it. Until my bosses bring it up, I will take solace from the fact that upon Googling him I found that "in three separate opinions, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that.... [his] understanding of a 20-year-old state law was contrary to what the law actually said."
No comments:
Post a Comment