Personal Blogs

All my posts: https://learn1.open.ac.uk/mod/oublog/view.php?u=zw219551

or search for 'martin cadwell -caldwell' Take note of the position of the minus sign to eliminate caldwell returns or search for 'martin cadwell blog' in your browser. There is a space between my name and the minus sign and NO space before 'caldwell' to eliminate the name 'caldwell' in the Google listings

I am not on YouTube or social media

Cadwell NOT Caldwell

You Blockhead!

[ 4 minute read ]

Opinion

Yesterday, I was listening to LBC, the national 'phone-in' radio station in the UK. One of the presenters posed a question that had me reaching for my phone, at least mentally. Knee-jerk reactions I am good at; too good. A more measured approach is to wait a while and listen to what people have to say before wading in and knocking their opinions aside like so many skittles in front of a heavy building site excavator. Oh yes, on the subject of why are more people in the service industry getting more abuse from customers I have an opinion; one that has not changed in years. I switched the radio off because I felt I would be irritated by the callers. Perhaps I should have left the radio on, locked all my doors and shut my windows and opened a bottle of cough mixture to dull my ire. Maybe I would have learnt something. But, I am fed up with people bleating that they are victims when they have done nothing to prepare themselves for real life.

'Why are more people in the service industry getting more abuse these days?' or something like that. I almost never state my position on topical issues or current affairs. But this one really gets my goat. It is not the question or the target that is important to me, it is the hegemony behind the question. There seems to be a position that the customer is wrong to be enraged by the actions of train staff and doctor's surgery reception staff and so on. While I don't condone letting any of our emotions fly free in public and I am a firm believer, in that vein that there should be no Public Displays of Affection, I cannot help but have a ready response to the statement 'Abuse of our staff will not be tolerated.' My answer to that is, 'Then employ people who are good at their jobs!' It is not enough to just be able to speak and write the appropriate language if you deal with the public; it never was. Yet that is all I seem to get from people behind desks with public-facing roles. I do not notice any Customer Service training at all. Surely, staff dealing with the public should be trained to diffuse tension. If they cannot do it they should be relieved of their job, moved to another department and their CV closely scrutinised for fraud.

Surely, a good government should make good customer service a Health and Safety issue. There should absolutely be people wandering around calming people down. Instead, political parties back-stab each other at their conferences and foment an attitude of 'It is okay to attack anyone who does not belong in our group or disagrees with us.' I should like to bar any person from office who promotes such behaviour, except I cannot. Instead i have to expect to find the public emulating public figures who are demonstrating themselves to be less than civil.

Why are more staff getting abuse? It is two-fold: Because the public have no moral compass from which to steer and because staff have personal phones that they not only interrogate first thing in the morning but also throughout the day. Staff can get bad news during the day that will affect their disposition for hours afterwards. An example is this: If someone is dumped by their partner but the affected person must be at work, we cannot expect that person to compartmentalise such an issue and be professional at work. Why not? Because they are not trained to do so. Perhaps cabin crew in airliners might be and military figures but anyone else, no chance.

I have long stated that I find most of the world's ills come from internet access and social interaction through mobile phones. Ignorance is bliss may be a old aphorism, if it actually is an aphorism, but it is definitely more relevant today than when I first heard it. 

Text message: I have left you. Text message: You have failed your exams. Text message: Grandma id dead. Text message: You have won ten thousand pounds. 

In my eyes, the overriding issue is this: we are living multiple lives with multiple influences simultaneously. My politican derides other people and shows contempt and my phone tells me I am a bad person or not deserving of good attention while the person on front of me has a whole bunch of issues that they have not been trained to deal with but they are inadequately dealing with me. Go figure. Properly and thoroughly train people to deal with their lives BEFORE they are given jobs or take their phones and society-wide connection away.

Oh, and stop being mean to each other you blithering idiot politicians. Immunity in the House of Commons should be abolished. Yet, let us look at how politicians get to where they are. People actually vote for back-stabbers as thought these candidates are normal. Where did the BBC go? Once a stalwart of respectability it is now a reflection of the people, who in a vicious circle reflect it. Who thought that was a good idea? I might say it all started with 'EastEnders'. As a docu-drama, cool. As a soap with characters that the public identify with and so find relevance and validity in their own lives? definitely not a good idea to air it.

Would you prefer to not know the truth, Martin? No. Politicians are not good people or at least act as though they are five years old or drunk and television dramas and perhaps more pertinently, EastEnders, are from scripts written by people with good imaginations making money; the more salacious the better! No, I definitely want the truth.

Get under the stairs with a torch and a sandwich and stay there until the world has recovered some decorum.