Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search Topic:
uniqs
44
share rss forum feed

UverseTech2

join:2012-08-04
reply to AnonMan

Re: NEWS: AT&T Plans Slew of U-Verse Updates in 2013



It's all about time to the techs not cost savings. ATT knows nothing of cost savings, they are driven by pure efficiency metrics.

You should witness how much they waste on sending techs out of town, most of that is made up emergency telco subsidies paid for by us. You know how life depends on wired communications, especially Uverse.

Austinloop

join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX
kudos:1
Just for clarity, UverseTech, are you still an AT&T employee? You sound like a very disgruntled ex-employee.


Rangersfan

@sbcglobal.net
said by Austinloop:

Just for clarity, UverseTech, are you still an AT&T employee? You sound like a very disgruntled ex-employee.

I have wondered the same thing.

UverseTech2

join:2012-08-04
reply to Austinloop
Actually I liked working for ATT, I got to travel thru TX. I just call it like it is, most don't like to hear that.

I left to get my CCNA and I'm going back to them in mid 2013.

I know I sound negative but sometimes the truth hurts. All of my posts come from my personal experiences, and following up on those untrained or under trained techs.

Pair bonding to be specific is the hardest thing for most Uverse techs to accomplish. Not sure why, but everywhere I have been they avoid them like the plague. This is the key to all of these so called speed upgrades.

When I did these installs I never used the computer assigned pairs. I would go to the premise, put 2 tone generators on 2 pairs I could see making it back to the CO, and then at the crossbox I would call MLAC and change VRAD out pairs to the last 2 consecutive pairs available on the very last card. This method worked in every instance, it's just not by the book. It was the only way to get my jobs completed in the time constraints given.

You see most techs will just kick the job to IR and run, how can they possibly ever figure out how to do them.


davidg
Good Bye My Friend
Premium,MVM
join:2002-06-15
none
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to UverseTech2
said by UverseTech2:

It's all about time to the techs not cost savings. ATT knows nothing of cost savings, they are driven by pure efficiency metrics.

then they should speed up access to the centers. I've dealt with them for 20 years now, and having a tech sitting at my shop or tower for an hour or more just waiting on a tester or someone in the CO to pick up. Same way when we as a customer call in, except now that damn auto tester goes round and round before you can get a live person.
--
Lack of Preparation on YOUR Part does NOT Constitute an Emergency on Mine!

UverseTech2

join:2012-08-04
Speeding up access would have been wonderful, except in late June this year, not sure if it is still in place, the Uverse techs had to call in to a help line for all IR (no sync or various things) tickets. This IR help desk was comprised of non-technical contractors at the beginning, and they had to bless all trouble tickets.

When I would call in for a FTTP ticket for things like no GPON or BPON installed at premise they would have me attempt to run a selt termination test. I would respond with what side of the fiber should I put my VDSL tester on, they would take a few minutes and belive it or not most would give me an answer. After I finished laughing, I would just hang up. This test is for determining approx where the copper cable was shorted. After my first brush with the kindergarten helpdesk I decided to never put in a ticket and just call my IR friends direct, or kick the FTTP jobs with nothing at the premise.

Merlin

join:2012-06-08
Dallas, TX
reply to UverseTech2
said by UverseTech2:

Actually I liked working for ATT, I got to travel thru TX. I just call it like it I perceive it to be, and most get tired of hearing it.

Fixed that for you.

said by UverseTech2:

I left to get my CCNA and I'm going back to them in mid 2013.

I wouldn't be too sure about that.