Wholesale Broadband Buyers Forum
Finally an ISP decides to try to call other ISPs to arms to tackle BT incompetence. No surprise that it's Adrian Kennard from AAISP behind this.
http://www.wbbf.uk/
Here's Adrian's blog entry which details his latest battle against 'procedure':
http://www.revk.uk/2014/12/bt-hate-site.html
It would be great to hear that PN take this opportunity to join with other ISPs to knock BT into shape as an industry initiative. Given the lack of any evidence that PN management are attempting to deal with with the root cause of issues, rather than firefighting, I won't hold my breath...
A New Year's resolution perhaps
http://www.wbbf.uk/
Here's Adrian's blog entry which details his latest battle against 'procedure':
http://www.revk.uk/2014/12/bt-hate-site.html
It would be great to hear that PN take this opportunity to join with other ISPs to knock BT into shape as an industry initiative. Given the lack of any evidence that PN management are attempting to deal with with the root cause of issues, rather than firefighting, I won't hold my breath...
A New Year's resolution perhaps
About time BT were held accountable for their (in)actions! 
Interesting that he says "Would billing you for every time you screw up help matters?"
Some years ago I worked in an IT support role, as a team manager.
Our team was on-call 24*7 for stuff that, largely, we (or earlier team members) had developed ourselves.
Our T's & C's and overall pay meant that we just did the work, on a rota we managed ourselves, no complaints about the arrangement as it was seen as "part of the job".
But over time we noticed the number of calls increasing. Our analysis (which was very thorough) found that essentially this was nearly always down to "laziness" by the operational staff who were working shifts running our software through the night.
Training, instructions, etc. etc. for these staff were reviewed and "improved" (not really needed but we wanted to show willing) but nothing changed.
So we then introduced a payment system, cash paid to the person called. Taken from the "operations" budget.
The amount depended on the agreed cause of the call, worked out at a regular (monthly) review between the development/support and operational teams reps.
Payment for a fault deemed to be within "our" remit was zero.
One that was first (provably) an operational error but that some (incomplete) attempts had been made to check and follow standard recovery was at a standard level.
If no attempts were made to run standard repair/recovery payment was double.
We were paid the same whether it was solved by a phone call or going into work and staying all night.
This "concentrated the minds" of the operational management surprisingly quickly.
Some years ago I worked in an IT support role, as a team manager.
Our team was on-call 24*7 for stuff that, largely, we (or earlier team members) had developed ourselves.
Our T's & C's and overall pay meant that we just did the work, on a rota we managed ourselves, no complaints about the arrangement as it was seen as "part of the job".
But over time we noticed the number of calls increasing. Our analysis (which was very thorough) found that essentially this was nearly always down to "laziness" by the operational staff who were working shifts running our software through the night.
Training, instructions, etc. etc. for these staff were reviewed and "improved" (not really needed but we wanted to show willing) but nothing changed.
So we then introduced a payment system, cash paid to the person called. Taken from the "operations" budget.
The amount depended on the agreed cause of the call, worked out at a regular (monthly) review between the development/support and operational teams reps.
Payment for a fault deemed to be within "our" remit was zero.
One that was first (provably) an operational error but that some (incomplete) attempts had been made to check and follow standard recovery was at a standard level.
If no attempts were made to run standard repair/recovery payment was double.
We were paid the same whether it was solved by a phone call or going into work and staying all night.
This "concentrated the minds" of the operational management surprisingly quickly.
I really hope that Plusnet intend to participate in this forum.
If they don't I think we can take it that far from being an advantage that Plusnet are part of the BT group, it is a definite disadvantage as Plusnet will not, not matter how bad the service is, upset their 'masters'.
If they don't I think we can take it that far from being an advantage that Plusnet are part of the BT group, it is a definite disadvantage as Plusnet will not, not matter how bad the service is, upset their 'masters'.
Quote from: jelv I really hope that Plusnet intend to participate in this forum.
Shortly after starting this thread I did see a familiar name listed as 'our newest member' so you never know...
