Complaint Review: Atlanta 7 - Rescuecom

I never looked at this rebuttal before but it is complete and utter nonsense that a company would tell a technician to go on 6 of the same kinds of assignments and never advise the technician of what kinds of errors were made or even that there were errors! The previous "rebuttal" was merely a sad attempt to redeem the name of a scandalous and unethical company. How else could one explain the billing errors that have been posted. I never expected to be paid for training, nor did I "beef up" my resume'. I did however make a mistake in believing that if a customer was unhappy with the work, charges or both that the manager would advise me on the specific reasons. No matter how experienced one is in a field there is a learning curve that comes along with taking the position and doing things that companies' way. If a company is ethical, an employee will find out what problems exist with their performance as they proceed. If a company is not then the employee may or may not find out. It will depend on whether or not it's to the companies' advantage. I was not trying to drag anyone down by posting the facts. I was merely making the public aware that this Rescuecomm branch is among the more unethical ones. This group will grag itself down, if it hasn't already.

I work for Rescuecom of Atlanta.
I am a Technician.

ALL OF WHAT HE EXPERIENCED IS IN THE CONTRACT
Every single BIT of it.
It's in my contract, too.

It's in everybody's contract.

I have many years of experience servicing business' technology needs
and working with various technicians.

I have seen this whole situation before.
Thankfully, it does NOT happen often.

It's called "Unqualified Technician Screws-Up a Bunch of Jobs and Wants to Get Paid SIMPLY Because He Was THERE"

Well, this is sub-contract work. You NEVER get paid if the job isn't done correctly. Never.

Who is going to pay you? The customer? No.
The owner? No... the customer isn't paying twice, neither will the owner pay twice.
This is sub-contract work. It's for businesses.
It's mission-critical. It is not "paid training".

IN FACT, the contract stipulates very specifically that all training will be UNPAID.

The reason he wasn't sent out again to the jobs he screwed-up is because he obviously wasn't qualified.
Hello? Knock-knock, "Anonymous". Did you READ your contract?
If you had a clue about anything - you would know that what you did was grounds for lack of payment and termination from day one, job one.

When the customer asks for a refund on EVERY JOB, who can deny that he has no clue?
HE (anonymous) doesn't even deny that the customer asked for a refund on EVERY JOB that he went on!!

However, he was given chances.. on different jobs, different problems... hopefully he could do SOMETHING! No, he BOTCHED EVERYTHING HE TOUCHED.

I have never worked on a job where the customer was issued a refund. Not in my entire career.
If I did, I wouldn't expect to get paid on those jobs!

"Anonymous" beefed up his resume and lied about his abilities.

He lied to the customers about his abilities.

He lied to the owner about conversations he had with the customers. He lied to the owner about what was discussed with the customers. He lied about how the jobs were going.

He allowed his personal life to interfere with his work. He was not on-time and he didn't stay for the whole business day, as agreed.

CAR REPAIRS ARE NOT "FOR RESCUECOM".
For Christ's sake, man... get a grip.
Your car is your car.

If anyone left Rescuecom for McDonalds, it was "Anonymous"... it's hard to screw-up burger-flipping and lettuce-topping.

This guy was not around long enough to "get to know" any of the other Techs - certainly not long enough to "know the history" of the company.

We almost lost our relationships with 6 customers because of this guy - and there's no reason why the owner should go bankrupt for his idiocy too.

He didn't help anyone. He brought nothing to the table except lies and irresponsibility... and now he wants money for it!

Well. "Anonymous"... if you're going to accuse people of things - you could be a man and use your name... however, you are not a man.

You're a liar, cheat, irresponsible... and you are demanding that others go down in the hole WITH YOU. You're a real piece of work.

Please, go back to school.
Then, be honest about it.
Honesty will get your miles further.
People can work with the truth... they can help you. They can't help you succeed if you claim to be something that you ARE NOT.

I feel sorry for you, in a weird way, but you did this to yourself.
Honesty. People can respect honesty. You weren't honest.
Move on. Don't try to drag us down with you.

First of all, there are holes in the so called rebuttal about Rescuecom. Most likely the technician in question was coached on what to say by the Franchise owner. There may be truth about someone going to jobs behind me and doing the jobs over but the fact of the matter is, if you don't tell the person that something is wrong until payday how will they know? Anyone can see that has nothing to do with babysitting.

I never asked anyone for anything.Anything I got I received because he needs technicians as bad as I needed work. The statement about seeing me buy an Access book is a bold faced lie. Why? Well because I didn't buy one in the presence of the owner.I bought them when we left our first meeting with the client when I was out with my girlfriend to save me time on coding.

Furthermore, I did not lie about being able to tie the three applications together I underestimated the amount of time it would take and did not consider what it would take to make it editable yearly by them (which would have been addressed properly if the franchise owner knew anything about the SDLC and insisted we use it).

I showed the client that Access could be tied in to the Excel spreadsheets they wanted. When I explained to them about the other things that they and I had not considered they stopped the project which is what happens when you use RAD to develop something sometimes. Actually it sometimes happens when use SDLC also .That is one of the risks you take.

Knowing the truth, I welcome any and all curved points of view. If this guy should have fired, me then he could have just as easily done it. Why torture both of us. I had already spent my savings trying to work for him.

What would I stand to gain by taking a job that I already knew I could not do. I submit to you, the reader, that I would not. I am here to also tell you that technicians have quit this company to go and work for McDonalds. What does that say?

The "The Atlanta Branch of Rescuecom" has been very clear and has stated numerous times at technician meetings every Friday that we would not get paid for work that the owner was forced to send another technician on to fix. Simply stated, if tech #1 did not fix the problem and the owner has to send tech #2 out on a "warranty call", the hours tech #2 spends repairing tech #1's work will be deducted from tech #1's hours. Rescucom is not in the business of babysitting techs by sending a second tech along with the one that need training. My question to "anonymous" is who would get paid then? The trainer or the trainee? Techs are also told NOT to accept a job if they cannot do it. For example, I am not a printer guy. I do not take jobs that require installing printer kits, drums, rollers, whatever. "anonymous" was given 5 jobs, of these five jobs, the owner had to give full refunds too and the other 3 he had to send a second tech on to do the job correctly. Even after all this the owner asked "anonymous" if he could build a custom Access database that merged 3 apps together. I personally would not have given "anonymous" another chance, especially when the owner saw "anonymous" purchase an Access How-To book, but I am not the owner. "anonymous" was told to be onsite at the customers location all day, everyday up to 60 man hours, and that this was his only job. "anonymous" would show up at 9 am leave for lunch at 11, come back at 2 and leave at 3. The customer actually called the owner a couple of times asking where "anonymous" was. Because Rescuecom has already been paid for the job, the owner was forced to hire an outside firm to perform the job. I hold the owner at fault as much as "anonymous". The owner should have fired "anonymous" after the first 2 or 3 jobs that he failed on miserably. Instead the owner kept trying to give "anonymous" another chance, which he failed.

The "The Atlanta Branch of Rescuecom" has been very clear and has stated numerous times at technician meetings every Friday that we would not get paid for work that the owner was forced to send another technician on to fix. Simply stated, if tech #1 did not fix the problem and the owner has to send tech #2 out on a "warranty call", the hours tech #2 spends repairing tech #1's work will be deducted from tech #1's hours. Rescucom is not in the business of babysitting techs by sending a second tech along with the one that need training. My question to "anonymous" is who would get paid then? The trainer or the trainee? Techs are also told NOT to accept a job if they cannot do it. For example, I am not a printer guy. I do not take jobs that require installing printer kits, drums, rollers, whatever. "anonymous" was given 5 jobs, of these five jobs, the owner had to give full refunds too and the other 3 he had to send a second tech on to do the job correctly. Even after all this the owner asked "anonymous" if he could build a custom Access database that merged 3 apps together. I personally would not have given "anonymous" another chance, especially when the owner saw "anonymous" purchase an Access How-To book, but I am not the owner. "anonymous" was told to be onsite at the customers location all day, everyday up to 60 man hours, and that this was his only job. "anonymous" would show up at 9 am leave for lunch at 11, come back at 2 and leave at 3. The customer actually called the owner a couple of times asking where "anonymous" was. Because Rescuecom has already been paid for the job, the owner was forced to hire an outside firm to perform the job. I hold the owner at fault as much as "anonymous". The owner should have fired "anonymous" after the first 2 or 3 jobs that he failed on miserably. Instead the owner kept trying to give "anonymous" another chance, which he failed.

The "The Atlanta Branch of Rescuecom" has been very clear and has stated numerous times at technician meetings every Friday that we would not get paid for work that the owner was forced to send another technician on to fix. Simply stated, if tech #1 did not fix the problem and the owner has to send tech #2 out on a "warranty call", the hours tech #2 spends repairing tech #1's work will be deducted from tech #1's hours. Rescucom is not in the business of babysitting techs by sending a second tech along with the one that need training. My question to "anonymous" is who would get paid then? The trainer or the trainee? Techs are also told NOT to accept a job if they cannot do it. For example, I am not a printer guy. I do not take jobs that require installing printer kits, drums, rollers, whatever. "anonymous" was given 5 jobs, of these five jobs, the owner had to give full refunds too and the other 3 he had to send a second tech on to do the job correctly. Even after all this the owner asked "anonymous" if he could build a custom Access database that merged 3 apps together. I personally would not have given "anonymous" another chance, especially when the owner saw "anonymous" purchase an Access How-To book, but I am not the owner. "anonymous" was told to be onsite at the customers location all day, everyday up to 60 man hours, and that this was his only job. "anonymous" would show up at 9 am leave for lunch at 11, come back at 2 and leave at 3. The customer actually called the owner a couple of times asking where "anonymous" was. Because Rescuecom has already been paid for the job, the owner was forced to hire an outside firm to perform the job. I hold the owner at fault as much as "anonymous". The owner should have fired "anonymous" after the first 2 or 3 jobs that he failed on miserably. Instead the owner kept trying to give "anonymous" another chance, which he failed.

The "The Atlanta Branch of Rescuecom" has been very clear and has stated numerous times at technician meetings every Friday that we would not get paid for work that the owner was forced to send another technician on to fix. Simply stated, if tech #1 did not fix the problem and the owner has to send tech #2 out on a "warranty call", the hours tech #2 spends repairing tech #1's work will be deducted from tech #1's hours. Rescucom is not in the business of babysitting techs by sending a second tech along with the one that need training. My question to "anonymous" is who would get paid then? The trainer or the trainee? Techs are also told NOT to accept a job if they cannot do it. For example, I am not a printer guy. I do not take jobs that require installing printer kits, drums, rollers, whatever. "anonymous" was given 5 jobs, of these five jobs, the owner had to give full refunds too and the other 3 he had to send a second tech on to do the job correctly. Even after all this the owner asked "anonymous" if he could build a custom Access database that merged 3 apps together. I personally would not have given "anonymous" another chance, especially when the owner saw "anonymous" purchase an Access How-To book, but I am not the owner. "anonymous" was told to be onsite at the customers location all day, everyday up to 60 man hours, and that this was his only job. "anonymous" would show up at 9 am leave for lunch at 11, come back at 2 and leave at 3. The customer actually called the owner a couple of times asking where "anonymous" was. Because Rescuecom has already been paid for the job, the owner was forced to hire an outside firm to perform the job. I hold the owner at fault as much as "anonymous". The owner should have fired "anonymous" after the first 2 or 3 jobs that he failed on miserably. Instead the owner kept trying to give "anonymous" another chance, which he failed.