This weekend I spent about one hour on the phone with three customer service agents. Here's why:
I have a product that I had bought from a well-known Indian company about eight years ago. It is a long-term product and offers online access. I needed to update my mobile phone number to be able to use some of its online access features. However, as I discovered this weekend, the only way to change that number is by going to one of their stores in India.
The first time I called customer service, they told me that I needed a specific piece of information to confirm my identity. Once they had that information, they could help me change my number over the phone. The second time when I called back with that information, the agent told me that I was missing another key piece. The same thing happened when I called the third time. And this is when I got angry and started to tell the agent that transacting with his company was a horrible experience. And that I would end the relationship as soon as I could. As he read me the company line of 'we need this information to make sure you are our client', I hung up the phone on him.
When my husband tried to ask me what had happened, I asked him to give me a few moments to calm down. I felt fine in a little while but still had some things to say about how poor the experience was.
Later that day, all of a sudden, I remembered my sister's recent adventure as she tried to get her passport renewed in time for a conference abroad. The process started with her trying to get an appointment via a website that opened up only for 15minutes every day. Once she had the elusive appointment in hand, she stood in a day-long queue at an Indian passport service centre. The next step is that the police come by to verify proof of residence. When a month went by and there was no sign of the police and her travel dates were drawing near, my sister went to the police station. This set into motion the 'workings' of a flawed system. The entire police 'thana' seemed to be in on this and began to send her from one office to another in every day. As another month drew to a close, my sister met a senior bureaucrat who was shocked to hear about the whole experience. And who had the power to make things happen.
Within two weeks of this officer coming into the picture, my sister received her passport. An effort that cost her over a month's work and endless agony. And all through this, she did not let her frustration take over.
I thought about this as I reflected on my frustration with the customer service agent. All I had done was spend about an hour on the phone and I was so upset with the company's inefficiency. On the other hand, my sister had survived a very unpleasant ordeal with much less ado.
Maybe I have become too used to systems that work. And maybe that isn't always such a good thing. Maybe difficult experiences and difficult people teach you to cope and adapt better. And maybe that's a lesson I should remember more often.
Tuesday 22 January 2013
Wednesday 16 January 2013
A crime to overeat and to be obese? Yes, I say
I know I do it all the time. Overeating is one of those guilty pleasures that most of us seem to succumb to, even if rarely. Today, suddenly, as is often the case, I started thinking about overeating and resulting obesity.
Maybe, it was because of the overweight and obese people I see everyday. Maybe it was because when I head to the gym after ages, I am not too happy with the new rolls I discover. Whatever the reason, I got thinking about the connection between overeating and obesity and if it amounts to a crime.
First thing's first. To account for any objections from the 'glandular weight-gain' brigade, I have to say that I am not talking about people who are overweight or obese due to a disease. But it is unfair and (yes I will say it) stupid to consider eating-related obesity a health condition or worse, a disability. Ala the South Park episode that had an obese kid on a wheelchair make fun of another kid on a wheelchair who was sans legs, I see plenty of obese people claiming disability spots on public transit and in car parks. And I feel more anger towards these people than sympathy.
For, isn't it a crime that these people have fed themselves so much that they weigh as much as a baby elephant (and in some cases, more)? Because by putting all that extra food into their mouths, aren't they snatching it away from others who are starving? Maybe this is all in my mind. But the classic American defense comes into play here too. Good ole' 'we didn't know'!
For, how can someone be accused of snatching food from another human being, if they don't even know of the latter's existence. Most Americans seem to seldom acknowledge the fact that there is a world outside of the U.S. This changes of course when a TV channel tells them that the world outside is trying to attack them. Then they raise their guns in panicked defense. But I digress.
The defense of 'I didn't know' doesn't work. It doesn't work when Bush and his army force their way into a sovereign country. And it doesn't work when a fat American continues to stuff unbelievable amounts of food into his mouth while a huge part of the world's population starves to death. If everyone who overeats in this country gave away all food that went over the prescribed human calorie intake for a day, I have an unscientific hunch that at least two starving people would eat well. This CNN story does talk about the crazy meals that some very popular American restaurants serve.
That foreign aid bill is unaffordable but the U.S. can afford to dole out social welfare and medical aid to its own human pachyderms. I guess end of the day they really believe what an immigrant once told me 'We are American. So, we are special'.
Maybe, it was because of the overweight and obese people I see everyday. Maybe it was because when I head to the gym after ages, I am not too happy with the new rolls I discover. Whatever the reason, I got thinking about the connection between overeating and obesity and if it amounts to a crime.
First thing's first. To account for any objections from the 'glandular weight-gain' brigade, I have to say that I am not talking about people who are overweight or obese due to a disease. But it is unfair and (yes I will say it) stupid to consider eating-related obesity a health condition or worse, a disability. Ala the South Park episode that had an obese kid on a wheelchair make fun of another kid on a wheelchair who was sans legs, I see plenty of obese people claiming disability spots on public transit and in car parks. And I feel more anger towards these people than sympathy.
For, isn't it a crime that these people have fed themselves so much that they weigh as much as a baby elephant (and in some cases, more)? Because by putting all that extra food into their mouths, aren't they snatching it away from others who are starving? Maybe this is all in my mind. But the classic American defense comes into play here too. Good ole' 'we didn't know'!
For, how can someone be accused of snatching food from another human being, if they don't even know of the latter's existence. Most Americans seem to seldom acknowledge the fact that there is a world outside of the U.S. This changes of course when a TV channel tells them that the world outside is trying to attack them. Then they raise their guns in panicked defense. But I digress.
The defense of 'I didn't know' doesn't work. It doesn't work when Bush and his army force their way into a sovereign country. And it doesn't work when a fat American continues to stuff unbelievable amounts of food into his mouth while a huge part of the world's population starves to death. If everyone who overeats in this country gave away all food that went over the prescribed human calorie intake for a day, I have an unscientific hunch that at least two starving people would eat well. This CNN story does talk about the crazy meals that some very popular American restaurants serve.
That foreign aid bill is unaffordable but the U.S. can afford to dole out social welfare and medical aid to its own human pachyderms. I guess end of the day they really believe what an immigrant once told me 'We are American. So, we are special'.
Thursday 3 January 2013
The 'fairness' doctrine
Back from our annual trip to India with a lot of things swirling through my head. Along with the repeated reminder that I have to blog about some of them at the least. So, what do I write about first--the racism, maybe?
I live in a predominantly Caucasian country (A) where I belong to a minority race and come from a 'brown' country (B) which does not recognize race but aspires to be 'fair' (read light skinned). This trip from A to B, however, took me through three different continents and very different manifestations of race. On our way, we had a 9 hour layover in London. The visa regulations on their official website stated that if you have a passport from B and a visa from A, the immigration officer could allow you to go out into the city. Therefore, when we arrived at London immigration, we went up to the officer on duty and asked if we could head out into the city. My husband, a citizen of A, could go out without a visa but my case demanded further inspection. Our Caucasian officer conferred with his colleague, an Arabic woman, who was very hesitant to let me step outside the airport, and then went to check with his boss. When he came back and told us that I could go out too, I asked what had prompted the decision. And his answer was 'we understand that you do not want to spend such a long layover in the airport'. I was very happy to be able to go out and did not let a caustic remark slip out about how I wondered if the immigration decision would have been as favourable if my husband had not been a citizen of A.
When we reached B, my husband was continuously feted by much older people, who asked for his opinion on topics that he had likely never given a thought to (like how to develop an eco-tourism complex). Just fyi, my husband teaches communication. Without him asking for any extra attention, people shouted from across a lake asking him to pose for photos.
The stories don't stop though. On our way back through an oil-rich desert nation, we had to pass through a security checkpoint in the airport. Part of the check included taking off belts, shoes...you know the drill. The officer on duty told the poorer-looking citizen from B right in front of my husband, very rudely, to make sure he took off these items and put them in a tray. But when my husband forgot to take off his belt and walked through the scanner, the same officer very pleasantly said 'Sir, don't worry, you don't have to bother about that'. As I felt angry and helpless (you just know better than to protest in an oil-rich desert nation), I had to bite my tongue again instead of pointing out the unfairness on display.
It is easy to say that colonialism left an indelible mark on countries like B but if we, the citizens of these countries don't change things, nothing will ever change. The Economist Intelligence says it is better to be born in Switzerland than Nigeria. While it will make a huge difference to the privileges you will receive, how can a citizen of A be better than a citizen of B just because he or she was born in A? A thought that always baffles and hurts me.
I live in a predominantly Caucasian country (A) where I belong to a minority race and come from a 'brown' country (B) which does not recognize race but aspires to be 'fair' (read light skinned). This trip from A to B, however, took me through three different continents and very different manifestations of race. On our way, we had a 9 hour layover in London. The visa regulations on their official website stated that if you have a passport from B and a visa from A, the immigration officer could allow you to go out into the city. Therefore, when we arrived at London immigration, we went up to the officer on duty and asked if we could head out into the city. My husband, a citizen of A, could go out without a visa but my case demanded further inspection. Our Caucasian officer conferred with his colleague, an Arabic woman, who was very hesitant to let me step outside the airport, and then went to check with his boss. When he came back and told us that I could go out too, I asked what had prompted the decision. And his answer was 'we understand that you do not want to spend such a long layover in the airport'. I was very happy to be able to go out and did not let a caustic remark slip out about how I wondered if the immigration decision would have been as favourable if my husband had not been a citizen of A.
When we reached B, my husband was continuously feted by much older people, who asked for his opinion on topics that he had likely never given a thought to (like how to develop an eco-tourism complex). Just fyi, my husband teaches communication. Without him asking for any extra attention, people shouted from across a lake asking him to pose for photos.
The stories don't stop though. On our way back through an oil-rich desert nation, we had to pass through a security checkpoint in the airport. Part of the check included taking off belts, shoes...you know the drill. The officer on duty told the poorer-looking citizen from B right in front of my husband, very rudely, to make sure he took off these items and put them in a tray. But when my husband forgot to take off his belt and walked through the scanner, the same officer very pleasantly said 'Sir, don't worry, you don't have to bother about that'. As I felt angry and helpless (you just know better than to protest in an oil-rich desert nation), I had to bite my tongue again instead of pointing out the unfairness on display.
It is easy to say that colonialism left an indelible mark on countries like B but if we, the citizens of these countries don't change things, nothing will ever change. The Economist Intelligence says it is better to be born in Switzerland than Nigeria. While it will make a huge difference to the privileges you will receive, how can a citizen of A be better than a citizen of B just because he or she was born in A? A thought that always baffles and hurts me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)