dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6
share rss forum feed


DaSneaky1D
what's up
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
reply to nunya

Re: Charter Installer Assaults and Rapes Customer

"Affiliated", meaning contracted?



nunya
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:12

Anyone from Charter - period.


horseathalt7
Premium
join:2012-06-11

The CEO is probably too busy thinking about how to increase his already outrageous salary to be bothered worrying about their customers.

What a friggin DISGRACE.

Tommy Boy....can't afford basic background checks now can we?



Jiminy

@charter.com

»fox2now.com/2012/12/05/chater-ca···n-woman/

Nevermind. I did, in fact, find an article that did state he was a contractor for Charter. The article originally linked did not include anything about Charter. Interestingly enough, the company states that background checks are performed for all third-party contractors. So, horseathalt7, do you wish to apologize for your baseless assertion, or continue to grasp at straws for an opportunity to bash Charter?



cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26

Oh great, using Fox news for verification! That's like using the National Enquirer!!

Not to be bashing Charter, but they obviously don't do a very in depth back ground check, or, they simply don't wait for the results of the check to come back, I guess.

I'm VERY leary of letting anyone in my house also, no matter who they're supposed to be working for. You never know if they are also checking out what kind of good stuff you might have to come back and rob you of.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/



nunya
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:12
Reviews:
·Charter
·voip.ms
·surpasshosting

1 recommendation


Oh great, using Fox news for verification! That's like using the National Enquirer!!

As opposed to using CNN or NBC? Both of which are about as credible as the Onion these days.
This isn't political, and yes, this POS is a cable installer.
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't.


cablegeek01

join:2003-05-13
USA
kudos:1
reply to horseathalt7

said by horseathalt7:

The CEO is probably too busy thinking about how to increase his already outrageous salary to be bothered worrying about their customers.

What a friggin DISGRACE.

Tommy Boy....can't afford basic background checks now can we?

Way back in the day, I contracted for Charter, and they did in fact do criminal background and drug tests for 3rd party contractors (and still do).
That said, nowhere in this story or any other I could find did it say this guy had prior convictions. So, how would a background check make any difference at all?

cloves69

join:2004-01-11
Midwest
reply to cork1958

said by cork1958:

Oh great, using Fox news for verification! That's like using the National Enquirer!!

Not to be bashing Charter, but they obviously don't do a very in depth back ground check, or, they simply don't wait for the results of the check to come back, I guess.

I'm VERY leary of letting anyone in my house also, no matter who they're supposed to be working for. You never know if they are also checking out what kind of good stuff you might have to come back and rob you of.

The news station is a local affiliate...

Background checks...unless you have an article saying otherwise, the guy probably didn't have a record. Kooks are out there, more apt to be assaulted by a person you know than a stranger.

On that note, I never let my wife be home alone when anything is being done at the house. If I can't be there, a trusted neighbor is there in my place.


wvisastate

@spcsdns.net

It is absolutely ridiculous to blame the employer or contractor for these insane actions taken by an obviously troubled young man. Charter does do background checks and drug screens on all employess even if they just answer the phone. I am in no way blaming the victim but why in hell would you allow a stranger from any company in your home to roam freely? I work for a similair employer and i am amazed on a daily basis when asking the customer if they know where their equipment was installed and the answer is more often than not no. This means they are allowing a complete stranger to walk around their home unattended clearly unsafe. Wake up world!


horseathalt7
Premium
join:2012-06-11
Reviews:
·DIRECTV
reply to Jiminy

IF Charter did a "proper" background check and nothing was found of course I apologize.....

When I am incorrect or make a mistake, I will step right up and admit as much and always have.

But I find it VERY hard to believe that this guy was absolutely clean.

@Jiminy:

Actually until the new CEO Tom Rutledge and his executive team came into the picture with their ill advised new policies, I can promise you that my experiences were actually very good. I actually praised Charter quite a bit.



Jiminy

@charter.com

Well, of course, none of us are in the position to determine what type of background check was performed. I'm not sure what your definition of "normal" is, in this instance.

Also, of course this guy wasn't clean. Who knows what else he's gotten away with in his past. Or, it could be his first offense. Nothing except this recent crime of his comes up on Missouri Casenet. He may have had a juvenile record, but that would've been wiped clean when he turned 18. Either way, not Charter's fault.

I didn't necessarily intend to defend Charter in this case, but more so common sense. If a Walmart employee, off the clock, robs somebody he met while working in his respective store, that would not be Walmart's fault. You cannot, absolutely cannot blame an organization for the action's of one man. You and a few others immediately jumped on this as a chance to bash Charter, and it sickened me that you guys did so, instead of chalking it up to the awful actions of one man and reserving/voicing your hatred of Charter for legitimate reasons.

It all boils down to treating a corporation as a singular entity. You, as well as many others on this forum I would assume, are against the notion that the government treat companies as people, with the right to free speech and campaign contributions. At least, I feel this way. But in cases like this, people are quick to treat a company just like a person. "I can't believe what Charter/Wal-Mart/Microsoft/etc did. They just don't care about their customers!!!" My sister in law does the same thing with Wal-Mart, because several years ago, a few managers made their employees work off the clock. In her mind, that entire company is evil because of the actions of a few people. If ya hate Charter, fine. There's lots of good reasons. All big companies suck. AT&T and Satco's are no better. But my point is that using something like this as an excuse to further your hatred of a company is downright wrong.


kherr
Premium
join:2000-09-04
Collinsville, IL

The government might treat a corp. as a person, but nobody has yet figured a way to put them in prison ......


wingrider01

join:2006-07-25
Saint Louis, MO
reply to horseathalt7

said by horseathalt7:

IF Charter did a "proper" background check and nothing was found of course I apologize.....

When I am incorrect or make a mistake, I will step right up and admit as much and always have.

But I find it VERY hard to believe that this guy was absolutely clean.

@Jiminy:

Actually until the new CEO Tom Rutledge and his executive team came into the picture with their ill advised new policies, I can promise you that my experiences were actually very good. I actually praised Charter quite a bit.

so you are basicly stating that you made an assumption based on no factual information?

horseathalt7
Premium
join:2012-06-11

I made my original statement based on limited information and I was wrong.

So for admitting my error folks are going to "pile on" ..???



Stay Classy.


whoaru99

join:2003-12-17

2 edits
reply to Jiminy

said by Jiminy :

You cannot, absolutely cannot blame an organization for the action's of one man.

Actually, you can, under respondeat superior if the actions are within the normal scope of employment. However, since I'm fairly confident assault and rape aren't within the normal scope of employment for a cable installer, respondeat superior doesn't apply in this case.

Also, if the person was a contractor the employer typically has no vicarious liability.


nunya
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:12
Reviews:
·Charter
·voip.ms
·surpasshosting

That's EXACTLY why all the cable companies and satellite companies contract out their "tough" installs. This whole "sub-contractor" arrangement is illegal too. The IRS has been slowly cracking down on them:
»www.insurancejournal.com/news/na···7364.htm

»www.wagehourinsights.com/indepen···ractors/

»www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Bus···-Defined

And the reason I bring this up ties into this story (I'll get there, I promise).
The cable companies have been running this type of racket for decades. When I was a cable contractor, there was 0 test and 0 training. Parolees flocked to this job. 1) no background check 2) no drug test 3) satisfies parole officer.
Even to this day, these young men and women are doing this type of work and being paid by "piecework". The problem is, these guys are often working for less than minimum wage when all is said and done. Been there and done it myself, and seen it done 100's of times. Granted, if you are fast and efficient, you can eek out an existence after the learning curve swings in your favor (if you can hold out that long).

These circumstances tend to attract many "less than desirable" folks into the business. That is where I'm going with this story. This "profession" or trade is basically set up to attract the dregs of society. I'm not saying all cable and satellite people are bad, but a disproportionate number are - and that's simply because of the scheme these companies are using to avoid paying these guys a decent wage.

I'm glad the cops interrupted and caught this piece of shit. We all know he was going to murder her. After all, she could EASILY identify him.
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't.

whoaru99

join:2003-12-17

I doubt they contract out to avoid liability for the crimes because they're not liable for something like that even with staff employee, again, unless it's related to the job performance...i.e. someone gets electrocuted because they somehow screwed up the install.

I'd agree though it's pretty likely related to cost.



Jiminy

@charter.com

said by whoaru99:

I doubt they contract out to avoid liability for the crimes because they're not liable for something like that even with staff employee, again, unless it's related to the job performance...i.e. someone gets electrocuted because they somehow screwed up the install.

I'd agree though it's pretty likely related to cost.

Follow the money. You're absolutely right. As long as it saves more money than it costs them in frustrated customers, this practice will continue. Not just with Charter, but most ISPs.

And I apologize. Even as I typed it, I knew I shouldn't have said, "You cannot, absolutely cannot blame an organization for the action's of one man." But as you pointed out, that's neither here nor there.

Nunya, I absolutely agree that the system in place tends to attract a less desirable breed of man. Those with a GED who bounce from job to job, sure. But I simply fail to see the connection between your point and this one instance of an evil man acting on his whims. You seem to be applying this exception-to-the-rule situation to a system at large. You're larger point may be true, but this case does nothing to further your goals. On top of that, everything you say about no background check, no drug test, is simply not true. The company in question has already stated their policies. It's not as if they can simply lie about that kind of thing. While your point (the background check issue) has zero factual evidence to back it and merely your own biased experiences from many years ago, when things we're different. My underlying point is that you're using this awful situation to further your hatred of Charter when there simply is no reason for doing so. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike Charter (or any ISP/Telco, for that matter), but one contractor going off the reservation is not one of them. It'd be no different than hating McDonalds because one teenage dirtbag employee spit in your burger. Does Charter condone the system that treats their contractors as sub-human and not deserving of a "decent" wage? Yes. But subscribers do as well, by expecting a service as minimum cost. If Charter required their contractors to have a 4 year degree and paid them 60k a year, just imagine what your internet bill would be every month. Customers always expect more for less, and this is the result. Best Buy hires teens in place of knowledgeable sales people. Burger King hires drop outs instead of world class chefs.

And don't get me wrong. I'm all for the reduction of third party contractors, as the articles you linked seem to indicate a trend in. In house techs means more accountability and tighter control in the system in general. But in the long run, customers will pay more, because we live in a capitalist country and no one can/will expect top brass/CEO's to take a pay cut to shore up the difference. Now that's a good reason to hate Charter...