💾 Archived View for dioskouroi.xyz › thread › 29419662 captured on 2021-12-03 at 14:04:38. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2021-12-04)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
________________________________________________________________________________
It’s ridiculous that a company as profitable as Apple runs their support and retail operations with such an inhumane expectation of efficiency that employees have to often handle three simultaneous chats and bathroom breaks over five minutes merit chastisement from managers. I’m sure that support is a relatively small cost for Apple, so the hyper focus on efficiency seems especially cruel and unusual.
Sounds like a similar situation to Amazon's warehouses.
This is how they got and stay the profitable. Remember, you're talking about a company that removes features to sell over-priced adapters or wireless earbuds or cases or charging cables or or or, while calling itself "Brave". lol
They floundered in the 90s by having no focus and no vision from a myriad of shitty CEOs. What brought them back to profitability was simplifying the line and making products that people actually wanted to buy in the iMac and then the iPod. Then the iPhone. I really don’t think their shitty working conditions for their retail employees is what is keeping them profitable.
As I have been ranting about it for more than half a decade. Apple Retail was basically left unattended for years. After Ron Johnson, it was John Browett, which got fired after only six months, then Angela Ahrendts and Deirdre O'Brien.
Their change in KPI to NPS. And cost cutting measures during the past 10 years.
I would have thought things would improved, and in some area it did as Deirdre is finally opening more Apple Store. Something that was nearly halted under Angela. But it looks like the people management isn't quite back to where it was in Steve Jobs era. After all she came from Operation, working under Tim Cook at one point.
As his medical bills started piling up, the employee says he and his partner ran out of money. “We had to start selling our belongings to pay bills,” he explains. “We downsized and spent most of the summer without electricity or air conditioning.”
When his paycheck arrived in May 2021, he found it was just $23, due to health insurance deductions. He couldn’t afford to pay rent. When he contacted Apple’s corporate payroll team, he said the response was, “We’ll look into it.”
This part was kind of shocking for me.
Low scores can often be about factors outside the employees’ control
Sounds like every "year-end review" I've ever been involved with in my professional life. Every job I've ever had has required an annual summary of "accomplishments" which incentivized a lot of the wrong things. Fixing bugs and removing tech debt aren't measurable "accomplishments", so they're avoided or done as fast as possible to move on to a "feature" that sounds good on a year-end review.
Net Promoter Score
My first real job was sales with a bonus tied to NPS. It’s punitive bullshit and everyone involved knows it.
We used to just ask people for a 9 or 10 if the experience was even remotely positive, because otherwise you get a bunch of happy customers who give a perfectly reasonable 8/10 and end up inadvertently costing you a bunch of money.
Did phone repairs for a third party company working for Sprint. Bonus was $1-5 per repair depending on the severity of the repair. If the store got glowing remarks our commission was 125%, 9/10 we got 100%. 8/10 we got 75% of our earned commission. Anything below that we got 0%. I think I got a commission payout only 3 out of 7 months I worked in that store before leaving because I was tired of corporate eating my commission on the whim of Sprint customers. Didn't matter how good I was at fixing phones and how happy a customer was with the repair when they left bad surveys due to Sprints lack of cell coverage in their area.
It reminds me of rideshare companies, where even though the ratings are a 50-point scale, (0.0-5.0), in the end it is a thumbs up/thumbs down system where anything less than nearly perfect will destroy you.
It provides a false sense of accuracy to corporate, while on the ground causes major issues, with confusion from customers about what rating to give. Not to mention applying these scores to experiences which don't really need one.
I always hit 10 unless they were actively rude to me. I don't gain anything when they pay their employees less so why give them a reason to do so?
they should put up a sign explaining how the rating is tied to the pay
More accurate title: "Some Apple employee have a bad experience in perfectly safe and OK paying jobs due to harsh managers".
The article opens with an account of suicide. "Bad experience" is also inaccurate.