happy Xmas from Hillarys

[royt]

Got coms statement through e-mail last night £ 60 deducted for mis-measure fines (why do we get punished on top of the extra workload we create for ourselves for ocasional errors), worked my socks of for past 3 weeks putting extra availability in to cover 3 for 99 timewasters and thats my thanks, i must have re-fitted 10 wooden venetian's in the past 2 months for no pay and getting totally pi--ed of with it. from now on I am writing all extra work I do in rectifying poor quality and going to speak to my FSM about it, anybody else feel the same.

also had quotes take 3 orders for me and promised blinds before Xmas, did they turn up. NO!! so its left for me to inform customers Happy Xmas everyone.

[desmorse]

Got 2 fines, but orders are over 200 numbers old, so absolutely no idea who they are or whether I agree.
Anyone know how to look up old order numbers on SAM?
All these fines suddenly appearing at Christmas, are we paying for directors bubbly?

[nonails]

royt said:

Got coms statement through e-mail last night £ 60 deducted for mis-measure fines (why do we get punished on top of the extra workload we create for ourselves for ocasional errors), worked my socks of for past 3 weeks putting extra availability in to cover 3 for 99 timewasters and thats my thanks, i must have re-fitted 10 wooden venetian's in the past 2 months for no pay and getting totally pi--ed of with it. from now on I am writing all extra work I do in rectifying poor quality and going to speak to my FSM about it, anybody else feel the same.

also had quotes take 3 orders for me and promised blinds before Xmas, did they turn up. NO!! so its left for me to inform customers Happy Xmas everyone.

Royt---I am emailing my FSM and Melissa with a stern request for payment of commission given away by Hillarys when they gave a huge discount to a customer who is not getting their blinds ( 26 silver venetains) before Xmas) I will lose over £30.00 on the job because they cocked up.
I will approach it correctly and in a nice friendly manner.
Depending on the response after the expected usual Sillary ( Its only me's) it will get sterner and sterner to the point where I will appoint legal assistance and go for either the legal approach or the name and shame publicly approach.
The way they treat a perfectly reasonable request will dictate how I respond. They harder ball they play the harder I will play. Someone has to make a stand.

I can if pushed .....no I'll leave it there. Lets give them the opportunity to be reasonable for the first time in their petty lives.


Besides that, had a call from a wooden venetian client ( remember them?) saying the ladder on one has broken after 5 weeks. Does the new ruling from the Colwick Gestapo mean that I will get fined if I send it back??
They had better not even try that one.
The idea of showing deductions on Statements by " Document Numbers" is to throw you off the scent so you cannot trace the source.
Let 2006 be the last year Sillary extract the urine, I can and will risk £10,000 to £20,000 to fund a legal fight if they want one

A Happy Christmas to the rest of you, even those who only watch and nod, and are too scared to stand up for yourselves

[russell]

nonails perhaps you could post your responces on this site but i wouldnt hold my breath it will take months for any action and by then your leads will be down too 1 a week but well done for not being a nodding dog advisor in a few months when us moaners have been worked out of the system the nodding dog will be watching nothing but wondering where we have dissapeared too well i say :PIF YOU HAVENT POSTED YOU MUST BE VERY HAPPY WITH HOW THINGS ARE GOING TELL ME YOUR SECRET GET POSTING yes men and women ;D

[grumperbear]

Yes, FSM would love to get rid of me. l'm sure l'm in the firing line for dismissal in the New Year.

[hereticus]

On the subject of 'unexpected or not understood' mismeasure fines, I have also been a victim of this in the past but have always managed to sort it out through my FSM at the time. It shouldn't happen but sometimes does, and should always spark a proper investigation by the FSM on the agent's behalf.

I would like to offer a positive suggestion to the company on how this can be controlled for once and for all. I sometimes sense a culture within parts of Hillarys that they will pass blame to the advisor if at all possible, probably so that faults don't appear in departmental statistics. Every department (order processing, manufacturing, despatch, etc) must be monitored internally for DOR's resulting from their errors so they are under constant pressure to explain and improve thier performance, so let's blame the advisor instead.

However, as we all know, if it is our fault (which usually means a mismeasure) we cannot get the blind remanufactured without an authorisation code being issued from our FSM before reporting the DOR, which then gets coded as an 'agent error'. The system should also make it impossible for anybody else at Hillarys to code something as an agent error without this same authorisation code, and FSM's should not issue such a code until they have discussed the problem or dispute with the agent. I can imagine that FSM's would adhere to this as they are also judged by the number of agent errors in their territory, so the fact that they are trying to keep their own figures down would actually work for us and not against us.

Surely this is simple enough - no FSM authorisation code makes it impossible for anybody in any department to code as 'agent error' !

One further refinement would be for the DOR order number to carry a suffix - at present the first DOR is suffixed 'A', the second 'B', etc., so if it is due to an agent error why not suffix 'X' and, when the fine is applied to the commission statement, the order number and suffix should be clearly shown to make it easier for us to accept that the fine has been properly applied.

This seems to me like a very simple and straightforward procedure so I offer it as a suggestion to Hillarys as a means of negating another area of dissent amongst advisors.

Also, please understand that I have not attempted to comment on the rights or wrongs of fining us at all - many of us feel that fining us for our occasional errors is not fair when we also carry all the costs of correcting the company's errors - that is a seperate subject for continuing debate. I am simply suggesting a way in which we can ensure that we do not get passed the buck because another department is trying to fudge its figures.

[ricko]

They must be short of cash. I to have been fined this week for 6 mis measures ( none of which were my fault ) one of them dating back to September.

[BlindWizard]

hereticus, sounds a very sensible idea and simple.

[Bear]

Happy Christmas everyone, especially those who try to do the job right, be it in Head Office or out up the sharp end.

To those whose intentions are shrouded in dodgy releases which confound confusion, will you please take stock over the break as to just where you intend to take this business in 2006, and try your utmost to
nurture a feeling of co-operation across the Hillary set-up.
From where I sit I see far too many pocket-Hitlers trying to score interdepartmental points and forgetting that its the Agent who sells the deal fits the blinds, brings in the money and nurtures on-going goodwill. It is not the given task of anyone in Head Office , nor is it on their job description to demotivate, sabotage, undermine, undercut, and lie to those on whom the whole operation depends.

This year has brought this forum --let next year bring the start of the changes that this forum drives by pooling the collective thoughts, bug-bears, and highs and lows of the job up at the sharp end in a cohesive, well-thought out sensible manner.

More exposure at Head Office of life at the front end would help a lot. Your edicts and conflicting mesages to the troops indicate that you have lost the faith and confidence of those on whom we all depend, and unless that is addressed, a gloomy future awaits in mid 2006.

Think long and hard and have a jolly break meantime.

Bear

[nonails]

bear said:

Happy Christmas everyone, especially those who try to do the job right, be it in Head Office or out up the sharp end.

To those whose intentions are shrouded in dodgy releases which confound confusion, will you please take stock over the break as to just where you intend to take this business in 2006, and try your utmost to
nurture a feeling of co-operation across the Hillary set-up.
From where I sit I see far too many pocket-Hitlers trying to score interdepartmental points and forgetting that its the Agent who sells the deal fits the blinds, brings in the money and nurtures on-going goodwill. It is not the given task of anyone in Head Office , nor is it on their job description to demotivate, sabotage, undermine, undercut, and lie to those on whom the whole operation depends.

This year has brought this forum --let next year bring the start of the changes that this forum drives by pooling the collective thoughts, bug-bears, and highs and lows of the job up at the sharp end in a cohesive, well-thought out sensible manner.

More exposure at Head Office of life at the front end would help a lot. Your edicts and conflicting mesages to the troops indicate that you have lost the faith and confidence of those on whom we all depend, and unless that is addressed, a gloomy future awaits in mid 2006.

Think long and hard and have a jolly break meantime.

Bear

WELL SAID, BEAR!!!!


I wish I had your eloquence. ( There's another big word!)

You have mangaed to state in your posting everything that I, and I feel, the vast majority of other Agents want to see happen.
We may appear to be a bunch of griping old gits who whinge on, and on, and on, but we do have the heart-felt best intention.

I know only too well that such things as 3 for £99 are a total loss to me.
My area is 28 miles from top to bottom and about 30 mles wide. And I am not in the exact centre of it!!

If I go on a 3 for £99 call and sell it it my two trips will on average be 60 miles ( forget the ones that dont buy!) That is 2.5 hours selling ,driving and fitting for a return gross of £14.00. Deduct petrol and motoring costs( about £9.00 on the Hillarys staff expenses basis, and I am working for £2.00 per hour. Then factor in the calls that are not at home, have bought already, and quickly I am at a loss.

On top of all that this year I have been forced to pay for

Hillarys Order Forms,
Costs of Credit/Debit card clearances
and a multitude of other factots "necessary to do the job"

Wooden, once a good earner are now no longer sold by me as the cost of selling , fitting, and multiple DORS make them a worse deal than 3 for £99.

As for the new offer I cannot make head nor tale of it and customers are going to be SOOOOOOOOO Confused, that credibility will be out the window..


Lets hope and pray that the meetings between Agents and them at Sillarys produce some REAL meat.


Happy New Year to all

Nonails

[catinthehat]

Wots this about paying for order forms, deb/cred card clearances ??

Spot on, nonails, the new "winter sale" is at least as bamboozling to us as the customer. If ads say 3 for £125 thats wot the cust expects, so why wouldnt they feel aggrieved. Make the 'selected fabrics only' box much bigger!