🚀 go-pugleaf

Christine <cmank@perfect-matrix.com> wrote:


>In the end, the only way to resolve all of this is to get a clear and 
>comprehensive answer from Bell as to exactly how this happened.

Good luck!   I can assure you that no one,  not even the President of 
Bell Canada, is going to get a clear and comprehensive answer.

>...
> A company, especially a regulated company, has an 
>obligation to ensure on an ongoing basis that its representatives are 
>knowledgeable and up-to-date on anything that would affect them in the 
>performance of their duties.
>
>In Ian Angus' article, he poo-pooed the conspiracy theory--obviously he 
>believes in his heart that there was no conspiracy involved here, that 
>this all resulted from simple incompetence.  He also states that 
>conspiracy theories are "impossible" to disprove--but surely an indepth 
>examination of what happened at Bell, how Bell ensures that their staff 
>are adequately trained and how Bell audits the sales made by their 
>employees to ensure compliance with the General Tariff would go a long 
>way to helping dispel suspicions. 

Have you ever worked at a telco?   It is a staggeringly complicated
business.  Telco employees react to this complexity by putting things
in compartments and then ignoring everything that is out of 
their compartment.  It's not that they are evil, incompetent or
negligent, simply that there is too much stuff to know.

This means that a telco only sees what it is looking at.   In terms
of process, I assure you that Bell has processes for training, audits,

and other processes.  But the central problem is untouched:  there
is simply too much stuff to know.

To make matters worse, there are accounting and regulatory
incentives to make the compartments small and arbitrary.

j.b.