The Ugly American, Day Four: The customer ain't always right.

Not a happy camper.

     So this little rant comes to you courtesy of my wonderful Wife's premier Black Friday encounter.  For those who do not live in the US, Black Friday is the ceremonial day after Thanksgiving where thousands of Americans attempt to kill each other to get "discount" prices on various and sundry items.  She had travelled to a specific store to buy a specific item and while she was there she encountered the ugly side to the Ugly American Practice.
     America has a saying that goes, "The customer is always right."  The idea of course is that a business' employees should do everything within their power to keep a customer happy so that said customer will return and do business with them once again.  On the surface, this is actually a decent little concept.  Even if the customer has made a mistake or is outright wrong, it is generally better to give into their belief in order to keep them happy.  However, there are instances where, no matter how much you may want to or even how reasonable the customer's demands are that you simply cannot give them what they want.

This is not my happy face.

 

      So in this instance as my wife is attempting to self checkout two very large and heavy items, one lane over a very irate customer is berating a cashier because she has told him that he can only buy two of the item (Oddly enough the same item my wife was buying, go figure) because the item was a Black Friday item with a limit of two.  The customer was very angry and demanded to buy as many as he wanted to.  He told the cashier that he had not known the item was a BF item.  (Note here:  The store only had like 4 items that were specifically BF items so the odds were kind of against this last statement being true) and even offered to pay full price for the other items over the limit of two.
     On the face of it, this seems like a reasonable offer.  Buy two at the discount price and then purchase the rest at a normal price.  The only problem is that most BF sales items are purchased by the store in limited numbers, say lot of 500.  This lot is specifically offered at the discount price and generally that lot is all there is in the store for the day of the sale.  That is generally why BF sales have very strict purchasing limits (1, 2 etc).  So if the Cashier and later manager had allowed the customer to purchase all of the item he wanted, that would have meant that later shoppers coming in to get the sales item would have be unable to do so.

Dunno why, just thought it looked funny.

      So in this case, there was no easy way out for the Store.  The manager politely refused to sell the gentleman the extra items no matter how irate he became because it would have been unfair to people who came later.  According to my wife, the shopper was later gently escorted from the building when he refused to accept the reasons for the refusal.  The Cashier and Manager did everything they could to defuse the situation and, from what my wife says, remained calm and polite even as the customer got angrier.
     The very crux of Assdom is to demand satisfaction when you are wronged.  If you get bad service, complain.  If a product you bought sucks, complain.  Never be afraid to voice your concerns when you feel you are in the right.  However, the flipside to that is to know and acknowledge when you are in the wrong and be big enough to admit it and move on.  In this case, the customer was in the wrong and should have accepted it, bought the two items he was allowed to and moved on.  Instead, since he was a jerk, he wound up with nothing.  I sense a life lesson in there somewhere.

End of Rant

SMOKING!

I'm grumpy because my mouth is on fire.

(Let me start this little rant by stating that I have nothing against people who smoke. Everyone has their own addictions and vices that make their lives complete and it yours is sticking a burning roll of paper and plant matter into your mouth and breathing toxic smoke into your lungs, more power to you. My own personal vices include Caffeine and Chocolate so who am I to judge? Now having said that bit of nice nice, onwards with the rant!)

So as most of the people who read my blogs (all four of you) know, I recently started a seasonal job working in retail. Since it is my first job of any kind in five years, I am very happy with this turn of events especially with the holidays coming up. For the most part, the two weeks I have worked so far have been very enjoyable and more than a little amusing. However, Friday Morning (Black Friday) I had to work from 1am to 7am alongside a young lady and found myself getting more and more annoyed.

Now before I go any further, I have to state that this young lady is a very hard working individual. She works a full time job and two part time jobs while attending law classes and raising an 8 year old daughter. For the most part, her work ethic seems to be exceptional. However, her actions last night reminded me of one of my most intense pet peeves when it comes to Smokers. During the 6 hours we worked together, she left the kiosk area no less than 8 times for at least 10 minutes at a time to go outside “for a smoke.”

Folks I have news for your smokers out there who seem to think that the world has to pause so that you can feed your addiction. Stepping outside to fill your lungs with smoke is not a right. It isn't a Federally Mandated Break. You don't have the right to stop working and leave just because you need a nicotine fix. You either need to wait till it is time for your break (if you get one) or wait till you get off work. It is that simple. The few times I have been management or owned my own business with employees, if I caught them skipping work to puff up, they would have been disciplined.

I like smoking because it makes me feel pretty.

Smokers who seem to think they deserve smoke breaks would be highly put out if I said, “Whups, my caffeine levels are dangerously low. I need to find a coffee machine and brew myself an espresso. I'll be back in 15 minutes.” Hell, I actually had a smoker complain during my last seasonal job when I had to stop and check my blood sugar levels because I was feeling horribly ill. Keep in mind he had already stopped for three smoke breaks in the four hours we had been working.

Duct tape optional

This is a free country, folks and you have the right to ruin your health with whatever vice or addiction that you chose. Go for it! If you want to mainline Drano, then more power to you. If you want to shove gerbils up your bum, have fun. However, don't expect the rest of the world to give a flying flick about it or your fellow employees to compensate while you go do it. Most organizations give a half hour to hour lunch and at least one fifteen minute break for full time employees. Wait till one of those breaks to go indulge your addictions. If you don't get breaks, then suck it up and wait till your shift is over. Your withdrawal is not my problem or concern.

End of Rant

I really gotta ask, WTF?

http://gma.yahoo.com/minivan-stop-turns-wild-chase-mom-kids-233648112--abc-news-topstories.html

Now folks, I am not even going to begin to comment on Some of the actions of the Police involved in the almost ludicrous series of events listed in the above article. Some of the actions that occurred were a little off and the idea that a Cop opened fire on the rear of a van filled with children strikes me as downright stupid. However as I read the article and watched the video, one thought kept dancing through my Caffeine addled headparts.

WHAT THE FUGG WAS THE MOTHER THINKING!?

So this lady on a drive with her children, presumably going on some sort of vacation, is pulled over on a routine traffic stop because she was apparently speeding quite a bit over the posted speed limit. Now in any ordinary situation, the cops would have spoken to her, given her a ticket and she would have moved on with her life. Cops would have gotten back in their car and went out for donuts. End of story.

Instead, the woman leads the cops on a chase that wouldn't have been to out of place in SpeedyNCranky 3. (Get it?) The chase winds up including even more cops and the aforementioned gun discharge. The mother winds up getting arrested and charged with multiple counts including child endangerment (Wonder if the cop who fired the shots will get that charge too?) A couple of Weed Pipes were also found in the car, but no mention is made of actual drugs.

Like I said, I am not trying to defend some of the actions done by the police, but you do have to wonder exactly what made the woman go so berserk? It sure as hades couldn't been the fear of getting a ticket. The Mother's actions smack of either some form of guilty conscience or serious mental issues. The fact that she would willingly place her kids in danger makes me question her maternal instincts.

As always I don't have any answers, just a whole bunch of questions that I will probably never know the answers to. I just cannot grasp what happened and what made it happen.

End of Rant

On Football, Pyschology and Bullying from the Blog of my Brother.

http://porkbrainsandmilkgravy.blogspot.com/2013/11/so-tell-me-what-you-want-what-you.html

     Well worth the read.  You may not agree with what he says, but he will make you think about it.

The Ugly American: Day Three: The price of the Ass.

http://news.yahoo.com/woman-gets--3-500-fine-and-bad-credit-score-for-writing-negative-review-of-business-233833012.html

The story behind the above article is wrong on so many levels that it is hard to cover them all. Every aspect of this story points out both the importance and danger of speaking out against bad service and dishonesty.

So according to the link a couple ordered a large amount of gifts from a company website. The website failed to deliver the merchandise and canceled the order while giving no explanation for the cancellation. Later, the couple left a less than complimentary review of the company. The company then fined the couple $3500.00 AND fed bad reports to the three national credit rating services. The rational was that the couple violated a very hidden clause that prevents negative reviews on the company website.

Now, on the face of this, the Company's actions were completely legal. The clause they invoked is in the Terms and Conditions section of their site and by using the site, it is understood that you have read the terms and conditions and agreed to them. By posting the negative review, they violated the agreement and were subject to punishment because of it. Like I said, completely legal.

However, legal doesn't mean right. First of all, the idea that a company refuses to allow negative reviews on their website automatically raises some serious red flags. How much does your business have to suck to make you ban any negative comments? How often does what happened to the couple in the article happen to other people? If you are afraid of people venting their dissatisfaction, then more than likely you are doing things to earn their ire.

On the other hand, what happened to the couple is a definite cautionary tale for those who wish to walk the Path of the Ass. More and more these days, people and corporations are trying to infringe on the most basic tenets of the 1^st Amendment. Besides the company listed in the article, places like Ebay actively discourage people from writing uncomplimentary reviews of people who use their service. Amazon has similar rules. Now neither of those two actually ban them, but do suggest reaching other methods such as working with the companies involved to resolve the issue.

It seems like more places and people are trying to legally or even illegally suppress any negative reactions to them. They put restrictions on their websites or on their store walls to keep them safe. And if someone dares to speak out, then they are made to look bad instead of the offenders. People are being actively discouraged from complaining when they are treated badly.

I was raised by a man who firmly believed in speaking his mind. If someone ripped him off, he complained about it and if someone treated him right he complimented them. He taught me to never be afraid to say what I feel and to speak out against ill treatment. Even then, there were perils and pitfalls to doing this. The Path of the Ass has never been an easy one and the actions of many today are just making it more difficult.

Like I said in the beginning, the Company's actions are legal at least on the surface because of an understood contract between them and the customers. I am not even sure there is a legal recourse for the couple to escape from the harm that has been done to them.

The 1^st Amendment rights of all Americans are under attack on so many different fronts. Certain corporations are doing their best to prevent people from speaking out against them. Certain organizations are doing the same thing. Even certain aspects of our government are trying to keep people from speaking out. Fear and intimidation are keeping people from speaking their minds. A special type of courage is needed now and I pray that more people are up to the test.

End of Rant

Does this purse make my Rant look big?

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/boy-reportedly-suspended-for-bringing-purse-to-school-192403545.html

A good friend of mine is always ranting about media bias and selective reporting. (Waves at TC) Course his rants usually focus on what he lovingly calls, “Leftist Liberal Media Bias.” He tends to ignore the fact that Conservative Media is just as biased and outspoken (Fox News Cough Cough) as Liberal Media (CNN Wheeze wheeze). Ahem sorry I have a nasty cold. But he does raise valid points that the monster that is modern News Reporting oftentimes edits or ignores news items that don't serve their personal agenda. The above article is an excellent example of this.

Now on the surface, this story is yet another example of some innocent person being punished for being different or unusual. A young boy has been suspended from school because he chooses to carry a very stylish woman's handbag with him to school. The boy, his parents and many others are crying foul and stating this is yet another example of the MAN cracking down on those who are not mainstream enough. Raise the protest signs and get marching folks to prove that the evil rulers cannot impose restrictions on individual expression!! CHARGE!

Whups, hold up on that charge for a second. Seems that the writer of the above article left out one teensy weensy detail that might shed a bit more light on the situation. Surprisingly enough this data came from the comments section. (I also confirmed it from other sources.) I say surprisingly because usually the comments section is filled with tons of name calling and horrible spelling. And I quote,

“Anderson County School District Superintendent Don Blome said Thursday that he could not discuss the specific case because of privacy concerns. However, he said all students, whether female or male, are prevented from having bags, purses, satchels and backpacks in the core classrooms like English and math. The bags must be stored in lockers during class time, he said. "We strive to make sure we treat every kid alike and there are classroom rules we expect kids to follow," he told KCTV5 on Thursday. "They can bring (bags and purses) to school. There's no policy against that. But the classroom rules are that they can't bring it to the classroom."

The boy in question attempted to wear his stylish accessory in areas and situations expressly forbidden by school rules. I am guessing these rules are in place for a reason, probably to discourage cheating or distractions during said classes. The articles quoted in the comments section stated and I confirmed that there is absolutely no ban on boys carrying a girl's purse or even dressing up as a girl. Well as long as your clothes meet school dress code that is.

So essentially, the kid broke a rule that he had to have known existed. He got caught for it and was punished with a one day suspension which is a very light punishment. The rule was not in place to discriminate against anyone since the rule applies to everyone. The right thing to do would have been just to suck it up, admit you made a boo boo and moved on, BUT of course a fuss has to be made because that is pretty much where our culture has devolved down to. The fault isn't with the kid who broke the rules. The fault has to lie with the SYSTEM that is trying to keep the kid down. Thus we have selectively edited articles that leave out the little details that don't support their arguments.

What we need is more sources who report all of the facts in a story and then let the people decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. This heavily edited and altered pablum most sources are scooping out these days is about as far from real news as I am from China. Still, I guess if people actually started reporting real news, people like me would be out of a job.

End of Rant

Chickens don't have nuggets!

http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/how-saying-no-to-mcdonald-s-might-lead-to-dad-losing-custody-165611460.html

Let me preface this rant by stating that I don't know the entire story behind this article. I have no idea if other factors besides the one mentioned in the above article are in play with the divorce case. I do know from personal experience with a friend of mine long passed that divorces can get extremely ugly especially when children are involved. Children are often used as weapons against the opposing parent either directly or indirectly as part of the horrific battles that divorces can become. All I can go by at this point is the subject and information portrayed in the above article and my own opinions about all of it.

So a Father refuses to allow his young son to eat at McDonalds because he feels the child has been eating too much fast food. He tells the kid that he can eat Anywhere he wishes as long as it is not McDonalds. Kid objects loudly and defiantly so the Father does the 21st Century version of going to bed without his supper. Now, a pyscologist and the Mother are using this bit of parenting to limit if not curtail the Father's time with the child because they view it as a form of child abuse.

Now on the surface, this seems like an utterly stupid argument. The kid was exhibiting very bratty behavior that in my day would have earned him a few swats on the bottom. The father was apparently trying to help the kid eat a little better, which in this day and age of childhood obesity should be viewed as good as a good thing. It seems obvious that the mother and the doctor are trying to turn what should have been a non-event into something way more serious.

Course, on the flip, an argument can be made that...well it was just one trip to McDonalds and that the child's bad behavior only occurred after his request to go there was refused. I know a woman who's son would only eat chicken nuggets (any nuggets from a chicken would do, not just the Mckind.) for a very long time. Kid was well behaved and very active besides this odd little fioble, so his mother allowed his odd dietary fetish. As fat as I know, the boy turned out healthy and happy and the last time I heard had started eating other types of food. With the strain of the divorce ongoing, one could argue that putting even more stress on the child could be bad for him. Time enough for parental discipline once the mess was over.

In truth, I have no real answer to this one even as my own opinion. Are the lawyer and Mother over reacting, maybe even exaggerating the situation to gain advantages in the divorce case. Most certainly. Could the Father have handled the situation better and avoided the mess all together? Prolly could have. I think my own personal reaction to the son's demands would have been based off the kid's previous behavior. If the son had been a “good” boy up until that point and behaved himself regularly, I would have probably allowed him to eat at McDonalds. On the other hand, if the kid had been a true brat on previous ocassions and constantly fighting and whining, then I would have probably not allowed him to eat there.

On the other hand, I would not have allowed him to go without eating either. I have found from many years of dealing with young children that if you put food in front of them, they will oftentimes eat it even it is not what they wanted. Sure the kid wanted MacDs, but I am betting if you had taken him to another place and put similar food down, he would have prolly scarfed it up in no time.

But all of these musings do not take away from the sheer silliness of trying to portray the Father as a poor parent because he refused to cave into his cranky kid's desire. I seriously doubt that any kid has been permanently scarred because his parent refused to feed him chicken nuggets. The scarring IMNSHO comes from two parents who can't make nice with each other even long enough to get unhitched. Come on, guys. You are supposed to be the adults here!

End of Rant

The following is a public service announcement. Please standby.

This message is brought to you by the “Get a Grip on Reality Society.”

To all of the people out there who truly believe or at least wonder if 9/11 was some secret plot by the US government. To all of people who think that Sandy Hook was some massive hoax created by the Democrats to have an excuse to take away all our guns. To the many people out there who think that the Boston Marathon Bombing was done by security forces in order to further their plans of imposing martial law. To everyone who is convinced that the US Government is secretly using bug drones to implant RFID chips under our skin so they can track us where ever we go. To everyone who is sure that Barack Obama is a closet Muslim Hell bent on installing Sharia law in the US. Essentially to pretty much everyone who really believes that their ordinary little lives are even remotely interesting enough to warrant attention. This message is for you. Please stand by.

You're Wrong!

Thank you for your time and we now return you to your regularly scheduled programs.

Lying like a cheap rug hit by a steamroller

So as I mentioned in the rather colorful blog a couple of days ago, I finally have found employment after nearly 5 years of being jobless. Admittedly it is only temporary seasonal work, but it is 8 weeks of solid, good paying work that will go a long way to keeping us afloat till something more permanent comes along. Today, I went to finalize the paperwork and was informed that I might not get as many hours as initially promised because my new boss had received an e-mail from the Corporate Office that informed her all hours would be cut to less than 30 per week. The reason given for this cut was, of course, blamed on the ACA and the Employer Mandate that requires all companies with 50 or more full time employees to offer insurance. Great, just great!

Once again, the evil that is Obamacare has cost people hours and income. Only one teensy weensy little problem with this idea. The Employer Mandate which would require said insurance has been delayed by the Feds for a year. No employer of any number of people will be required to over insurance until at least 2015. See the problem with the “Obamacare stole our jobs?” excuse? Quite simply put the company (Which shall remain nameless because I need the job.) used a LIE to cover the fact they are being a bunch of Dicks. (“On July 2, 2013, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced that it was postponing the effective date of the employer mandate under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“ACA”) from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2015.” Just FYI in case you were curious.)

Course this should come as no surprise to anyone. The past year especially has been ripe with Companies using the ACA to screw people over. I mean who can forget Pappa Johns announcing that it would have to cut employees hours because to over them insurance would raise the price of a pizza by 50 cents. Notice Papa doesn't have any problems raising the prices of pizza whenever the heck he wishes. Papa's rant was that Obamacare was “forcing” them to do this even though the Employer Mandate was nowhere near in danger of being activated yet.

Companies have been blaming the ACA for “Making” them do things even though all of the aspects of Obamacare that effect them didn't go into effect till Oct. 1 and the biggie, the JOB KILLER (Echo chamber effect) was delayed for a year. In other words, they are being jerks and blaming something else. The sad part is people bought into the lie and lapped up every single bit of the poop like it was an chocolate Sundae. I guess that means you may not be able to fool all of people all of the time, but you can fool most of the people most of the time.

I honestly no opinion about the ACA right now besides the “Really? Millions upon millions spent and you can't even get a website that works?” I think that, for whatever reasons, the system set in place is too deeply flawed to work the way it is supposed to. I do feel that there is a chance, albeit slight, that enough corrections can be made to let it work. However, I am sick and tired of Corporations and Politicians spreading all of this BullShift that is at best poorly disguised propaganda and at worst outright lies. I am also tired of all of these Sheeple who swallow the lies with gusto and regurgitate it back on command. Learn the facts, folks. Then you can rant.

End of Rant

The Ugly American Syndrome, Day 2: Religious Freedom, except for my religion!

http://minutemennews.com/2013/11/barack-obamas-dhs-advisor-mohamed-elibiary-america-islamic-country/

So a friend of mine on FB posted the above link the other day as part of my ongoing urge to disprove Interwebz Hoax, Pranks and Lies. (Yeah I know it is a wasted effort but everyone needs a hobby right?) I did research and found that the above individual did indeed post a Tweet that indicated that America was a Islamic Country following Islamic Values. I cannot speak to what the individual in question actually meant by his post, but I will point out that Twitter is a very bad place to get any in depth idea across because, lets face it, it is hard to get your point across in 256 characters or less. So the man may have been trying to speak of America's cultural and racial diversity or he may have indeed been indicating that Islamic Faith is conquering the US. I can't say one way or the other.

But that is not what this little rant is about. Nope not even close. This little rant is about all of the people out there who are...well ranting about Islam and Sharia Law or whatever the Hate Topic Du Sour Grapes is for the month. They rage on and on about Mosques being built in their neighborhoods or being forced to press #1 for English and fret themselves into conniption fits over the idea that evil forces are threatening the Merrican Way. You don't have to look far for them. Trust me when I say they are everywhere and will start protesting at the drop of a turban.

Now here is a very simple way to shut most of them up. As they go on and on about how wrong it is that Muslims are trying to “force” Americans to follow Sharia Law, tap them on the shoulder and tell them you agree 110%. Then say something along the lines of “And Gee, isn't it just as horrible that powerful figures in the US are trying to force the people of the US to obey laws based off of Christian Beliefs?” Trust me, that will shut them up for about 30 seconds as their brains reboot, then you will probably get a “Well, that is different!” or something like it.

See people seem to be under the mistaken impression that America is a Christian Nation based off of Christian tenets and commandments. They believe that it is all fine and dandy to base the Nations laws off the teachings of whatever version of the Holy Bible they like to not read. Well, here is a newsflash for a bunch of people. America is not nor has it ever been a Christian Nation. The US has not State Religion and our government was specifically set up to prevent laws and such being made specifically from Christian Tenets. In fact the only mentions of anything of a religious nature in the original documents are “Creator” in the Declaration of Independence (Not not God, Yahweh, Allah or any other specific religion.) and “in the year of our Lord” in the Constitution. (Arguable not even a direct reference to any sort of religion since this was a fairly common line for that time when speaking of the date.).

Still, we have people ranging from high ranking politicians down city councilmen insisting that America is a Christian State and that is perfectly alright to create laws based of of those believes even though such ideas directly contradict the whole idea of the US. They pass laws about abortion because it is supposedly against Christian Values to perform such acts. (Note that one is up in the air.) They push teaching Creationism (Intelligent Design) in Schools as long as the Creation Mythos being taught is the Christian one. They rage on and on when someone says a Prayer in School toward Allah, but are all happy eyes and smiles when a School Leader stands up and leads the School in a Christian Prayer.

Essentially So-called American Christians are completely and utterly opposed to any sort of religion being used to guide their country except when it is the Christian Religion then it is okay. They get peeved off when they are being “oppressed” but are fine and dandy with oppressing other faiths simply because they don't like them. I will leave you with a few examples how hypocritical this mind set is.

1. Bugshuck, AZ bans the building of a new Baptist Church because the Westboro Baptist Church shows that all Baptists are bigoted, inbred idiots who like waving badly spelled signs. (You can bet that Christians who happily oppose the building of new Mosques because all Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers would be outraged over this bigotry.)
2. A Group organizes a Zillion Person Walk to protest that under Sharia Law, women are treated as little more than slaves with no control over their lives or property. (Betcha these same people are all over laws that restrict birth control and abortions because women don't have the right to regulate their own bodies.)
   America has been from the day it was first imagined, a land of Freedom where each and every person has the right to believe the way they feel is right. Our nation was set up so that no one religion could dominate and control the fates of everyone. No matter what most extremists desire, we should never move away from that because nothing good can ever come of it. Course, in the end, this is just my opinion.
   End of Rant

A brief interlude in the rants for this important message

     We now return you to your regularly scheduled Rants.  Thank you for your support.