I thought I’d revive the old blog to share some experiences of organising at a telephone fundraising agency during my time there. I started as a Telephone Fundraiser there in 2005 and left in 2010. The union campaign really began in earnest in February 2006.
A major turning point in the union’s ability to defend workers came about when an experienced caller was marched off the premises and then sacked following a disciplinary hearing. Names have been changed to protect people’s future employment.
You could almost feel the shockwaves reverberate around the call-centre when it happened.
Sackings were not uncommon at the company.
When you started there, you were nominally on a three month agency contract until you proved yourself good enough to be taken on to their books.
But in reality, if you weren’t cutting the mustard within a few weeks, your days were likely to be numbered. Sometimes the managers told the caller that they had got the chop. And on other occasions, the agency rang the caller to tell them that they were no longer required. This happened to one of the first callers I recruited to the union. He was being bullied by a manager and he naively told her that he would be speaking with his union officer. Not a wise thing to do during probation. He got the call – ‘no reason, not obliged to give you one’ – the agency told him.
There were too many occasions when I had to help drown the sorrows of a former workmate in the pub across the road.
Management probably wished that they could give Tim his cards with a similar lack of fuss.
But the Dubliner was one of their most experienced callers and his service with them meant that he was entitled to a disciplinary hearing.
I well remember the evening when Tim was accompanied from his desk by a campaign manager to be taken to an office and confronted by a group of senior managers.
Tim had already incurred their wrath.
He had a reputation for standing up for his fellow callers.
One example was when everyone was struggling to get pledges on one of those campaigns where those being called had last given a couple of quid to the charity as long as five years ago and fundraisers were expected to get at least a couple of people, the vast majority of which were struggling on a basic pension to disclose their bank details in order to set up a direct debit for £10, £8 or £5 per month.
It depended on the campaign manager, and some were understanding, but in those early days, there were a good few Alex Ferguson-style “hairdryer” blasts or cutting remarks, sarcastic comments and put-downs directed at callers for not producing the desired results.
Tim frequently took these managers to task in these pre-calling sessions appropriately called “kick-offs” and asserted that the managers needed to stop blaming the callers.
This kind of insubordination was not to be tolerated.
It is rare for experienced callers to be heavily monitored. And monitoring in a call-centre means having managers listening in to your calls. Due to the high turnover of staff, the resources of managers and coaches are directed into monitoring new callers and those that are struggling.
On the night that Tim was charged with gross misconduct and suspended pending his hearing, not only was his campaign manager monitoring his calls, but also the manager of the whole call-centre and their boss, the operations director had a listen in.
What Tim was accused of was “skipping calls” – ie – putting the phone down as someone picked up, recycling the call (recording it on the system as an answerphone meaning that they would be called in the next 4 hours or the next day) before moving on to the next call.
This was seen by the employer not just as mis-recording calls but defrauding the company and the client charity.
Tim came out of the meeting where the charge was made and the suspension confirmed with a swagger of defiance – “You’ll be dealing with my union” he was heard to say as he was ushered toward the door.
The following weekend, loads of his workmates including a good number of campaign managers turned up at the pub for a gathering and all the talk was of a “stitch-up”.
At the disciplinary hearing, Tim proclaimed his innocence. He explained that the reason he had skipped calls was because of a system error that meant that although calls were coming through, the details of the supporter had not appeared on his screen.
The company sacked Tim following his hearing. The Head of HR dismissed his claim about the CRM maintaining that – “if it was happening to you, then everyone in the call-centre would have been affected”
When word got round about the sacking and particularly the HR boss’ “reasoning” behind the judgement – the initial response from callers was “that bloke does not have a clue about the computer system we use”
Every caller had experienced a some problems with the system.
And every caller knew that there were times when system failures affected the whole call-centre, just their campaign and sometimes just themselves.
Union activists got together and produced a survey about the system – see below
SURVEY FOR CALLERS REGARDING TECHNICAL PROBLEMS.
A; Do you from time to time experience problems like: computer freezing, stuck in wrap up, bank details disappearing, script and supporter information disappearing etc?
Tick as appropriate;
Yes
No
B Have you experienced these problems in any or all of the following ways? Only affecting you; affecting just my campaign; affecting entire call centre? Please tick as appropriate.
Always Sometimes Never
Only Affecting Me
NAME:
SIGNED:
Activists got busy getting these surveys filled in and signed by callers so that when at the appeal hearing, Tim handed them across the table to management, after viewing them, the CEO said that he would have to give Tim his job back.
Tim had decided that he had enough and told the CEO that he could keep his job. But word had got round. Collective action had saved a fellow worker’s job – if only he wanted it.
Industrial relations were never the same in that call-centre for years afterwards.
Trouble At T' Satanic Mill 