Thanks for the link. I was doubting his story until I read that. For those who didn’t this guy was going through hell with Comcast, not getting promised services, getting slow internet, being sent stuff he didn’t order, and being billed for stuff he didn’t use, and then having the bill sent to a collection agency. His claim is that when he contacted a top accountant there after a long time of this he made it clear that he was an accounting professional, but did not give his employers name. He says Comcast looked him up and then told his employer that he did give their name. It is not clear how much of a chance he had to defend himself before getting fired.
I now believe him. He sent documentation of his struggle with Comcast to the site cited.
There is no evidence he did this on company time. The story mentions that he dropped the complaint for quite a while when he was too busy at work. In any case termination on that grounds would have to demonstrate that no one else does this. A senior accountant at PWC? Hardly out of line. It also depends on company policy. My company allows private use so long as it does not affect job performance.
The latest article makes it clear he was fired for an ethical breach, which would make sense if they believed Comcast that the guy tried to use PWC as clout to get his problems fixed.
Being a accounting professional what does this have to do with Comcast bad service? saying he is aaccounting professional changes nothing. How is accounting professional going fixed this problem.I can see if he said he is IT guy working for high computer job.
Read the link. He called a high level Comcast accounting executive out of frustration, since poor billing is somehow related to accounting. The level of discussion with that guy was what demonstrated his background. I guess what he was trying to do was talk to the exec accountant to accountant.
Maybe, you’d think PWC would release the contents of the call that got him fired though. They aren’t being sued, and I can’t imagine they enjoy getting grouped in the press with one of the most hated companies in America.
And if the call really does have him trying to leverage his position at that company, I think most people would understand his firing.
In anycase, I think the larger issue is whether or not Comcast is purposely using faulty billing and poor customer service to wring more money from its customers. That seems to be the accusation the Accountant made that set Comcast’s managers after him. And given the huge number of people who complain about similar problems with Comcast’s bills, it hardly seems implausible. So regardless of what the truth about the guys firing ends up being, I hope the FCC or whomever does look into Comcast’s billing practices.
We left Comcast a long time ago, back in analog days, when the repair guy told my wife that she really couldn’t expect both the lines into our house to work, could she?
My guess is this - the Comcast exec had someone call this guy, someone who was not good at customer service and extra obnoxious. She accused the PWC guy of yelling at her which sounds plausible. Pissed at this obnoxious customer, they looked him up, found that he worked for a supplier, and decided to teach him a lesson.
The guy would have done much better going to the press - but maybe Comcast screwing its customers is no longer news.
Comcast has apologized. Fat lot of good that does.
That is what made it seem more implausible to me. They have millions of customers. They most have thousands of complaints a day. But they seemingly when above and beyond the call of duty to fuck this guy. If this was normal practice I would think we would hear about it. That is why I think there is more to the story than we have heard.
They apologized for not fixing the underlying problem. Not for anything else.
If the call where he supposedly dropped his employer’s name was to the controllers office, it’s extremely unlikely that it was recorded. Comcast records customer service calls as a matter of routine, but I doubt they record every call into and out of the company.
Good point. You are most likely correct.
I don’t think anyone is claiming this is a normal practice, and I think both sides more or less agree on why he got special attention. He got someone higher up the food chain on the phone, got angry he still wasn’t getting his problem fixed and used his knowledge of accounting practices and legal regulations to start suggesting that their billing and customer service practices were illegal. The specter of legal problems set off alarm bells in Comcast central command.
The only difference between the two sides is to what extent the Accountant suggested he’d also cause problems for them at his place of work.
Presumably Comcast gave PWC some description of the call they felt was unethical, even if they didn’t have a recording. PWC claims there was some sort of formal ethics investigation, its hard to see what that investigation would’ve investigated if they didn’t have some document of the offending phone call.
I knew a lawyer who filed a consumer complaint against his telecommunications provider with his state public utilities commission. The provider was a client of his law firm and he left off any reference to the law firm from the complaint, but they found out anyway and demanded that the law firm get rid of him, which they did.
The lawyer got an even better position at a different law firm and today is a partner. The law firm got downsized and merged into a different firm. The telecom provider went bust.
So you are saying that this is a good thing for the Accountant?
No, I’m just saying that in my particular example, karma won out.
Well, Comcast *is *the epitome of evil so…martyr?
I wouldn’t if I were them.
I don’t think PWC could care any less about Comcast’s reputation, but I suspect they care desperately about their own. They want their clients to say that PWC fired someone instantly for (allegedly) abusing PWC’s relationship with a client. In a way it is like some Swiss bank protecting the secret accounts of a drug overlord - a two-pronged approach of being scrupulously careful to abide by the law, and being almost as careful to protect the interests of their client even if said client is a scumbucket.
Which is exactly why they wouldn’t publicize their evidence - save it and give the guy no pretext whatever to sue for defamation.
When I was a manager, I was instructed if contacted about a former employee to say nothing whatever except date of hire, last date worked, and job title. Nothing else, good or bad. We were not allowed to say either that they were good at their job, or that we wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire. It was the code of omerta right down the line.
Maybe so - we have Comcast at our house and I don’t have the troubles with them that some people do. But it was a tactical mistake of the accountant to misuse his company’s name or whatever it was (allegedly), because now it is about whatever wrong he did or didn’t do, and not about Comcast messing up his account.
Regards,
Shodan
Billing is normally what plan you have so I don’t know what they are trying find out.