Odd thing happened at the Exxon audit today...
Warning: For Full Access Please Log In or Create an Account (Free)
The instructions clearly state that these are not "white glove" audits.
My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me.
Benjamin Disraeli
Benjamin Disraeli
I'll wait and see if the MSC accepts the "white glove" audit.
Or the manager could have been feeding you a line of manure.
I do have to agree with CPBurt, why would you do a "white glove" audit when the instructions specifically state these are not "white glove" audits? Your logic is totally illogical.
I do have to agree with CPBurt, why would you do a "white glove" audit when the instructions specifically state these are not "white glove" audits? Your logic is totally illogical.
.
Have PV-500 & willing to travel.
"Answers are easy. It's asking the right questions which is hard." (The Fourth Doctor, The Face of Evil, 1977)
"Somedays you're the pigeon, somedays you're the statue.” J. Andrew Taylor
"I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him." Galileo Galilei
Have PV-500 & willing to travel.
"Answers are easy. It's asking the right questions which is hard." (The Fourth Doctor, The Face of Evil, 1977)
"Somedays you're the pigeon, somedays you're the statue.” J. Andrew Taylor
"I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him." Galileo Galilei
I'm not going to argue or defend my decision to do a white glove audit, for the fact is that what I consider to be white glove and what you consider white glove will be different. So far when I've submitted (previously) what I consider to be white glove audits, the MSC has accepted them and paid for them.
The MSC is auditing its auditors, so I will do white glove audits from now on.
The MSC is auditing its auditors, so I will do white glove audits from now on.
I've had that happen before too. Not the day after but within a week they've had two of us go to the same location and the staff always want to know why. I really don't know what to tell them.
Is it the MSC or is it Exxon/Mobile? Exxon/Mobile could be considering a new MSC.
And what is working/clean/broken on one day may not be the next. I'm sure we all miss things at times. I usually take at least 100 photos, including things I'm not necessarily supposed to photograph, to help my memory when it is time to input. Sometimes I will see something in the photo I did not notice while I was there. Perhaps it was the lighting or clutter or customers in the way but the camera caught something I did not see.
Since I've audited all the major stations for all the MSCs I tend to photograph everything at every station no matter the photograph requirements. That way my answers are accurate and I'm never missing a photo. With a DSLR it takes an extra five minutes and I know I've given the MSC the best audit and the station a fair report.
I do a lot of very rural stations located in harsh environments. I don't nitpick things beyond their control but I also don't whitewash over issues. If they clearly take pride in their stations I'm not going to ding them over something a customer recently did or because mother nature has recently been brutal.
And what is working/clean/broken on one day may not be the next. I'm sure we all miss things at times. I usually take at least 100 photos, including things I'm not necessarily supposed to photograph, to help my memory when it is time to input. Sometimes I will see something in the photo I did not notice while I was there. Perhaps it was the lighting or clutter or customers in the way but the camera caught something I did not see.
Since I've audited all the major stations for all the MSCs I tend to photograph everything at every station no matter the photograph requirements. That way my answers are accurate and I'm never missing a photo. With a DSLR it takes an extra five minutes and I know I've given the MSC the best audit and the station a fair report.
I do a lot of very rural stations located in harsh environments. I don't nitpick things beyond their control but I also don't whitewash over issues. If they clearly take pride in their stations I'm not going to ding them over something a customer recently did or because mother nature has recently been brutal.
That same location is probably shopped by more than one msc.
There are mobil/exxon's in certain areas that are shopped by exxon/mobil,
the convience store brand and also the distributor for that region.
There are mobil/exxon's in certain areas that are shopped by exxon/mobil,
the convience store brand and also the distributor for that region.
= + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = +
There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots
==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==
When you try to please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody
There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots
==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==
When you try to please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody
@whiterosie wrote:
Is it the MSC or is it Exxon/Mobile? Exxon/Mobile could be considering a new MSC.
I don't know. But the manager showed me the Letter of Authorization the other auditor left the day before. It was the same letter that I gave him. What struck me is that the other auditor printed their Letter of Authorization in color. I prefer to save on ink and do mine in black and white. The manager was standing behind the register and was irritated that they had to go through another audit. He demanded to know why the same audit was being done two times so close together. A customer was standing at the counter and this manager didn't have the courtesy to check them out first.
So now I feel like I better not miss anything. Didn't [MSC name removed] send out an update letter saying they and the client were comparing audit reports?
Mod note: Please do not link the MSC with their client. It is against forum rules and an ICA violation. Thanks.
I recently dinged a Chevron for a filthy restroom that included old feces smeared all over. I got a call from the MSC to clarify and then saw it being reshopped on the board. I could have taken it myself but did not want to go back there as the place almost made me lose my lunch.
Another time I reported medical marijuana promotion at a Union 76. It too was reshopped within the week. That MSC also gave me the option of going back to the gang infested station, even though it was an audit, but I chose not to.
I think sometimes the company wants to be sure corrections are made immediately.
I did a Chevron a couple of months ago and they were selling alcohol to minors. I was assured their other program would look into it.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/27/2015 04:21PM by whiterosie.
Another time I reported medical marijuana promotion at a Union 76. It too was reshopped within the week. That MSC also gave me the option of going back to the gang infested station, even though it was an audit, but I chose not to.
I think sometimes the company wants to be sure corrections are made immediately.
I did a Chevron a couple of months ago and they were selling alcohol to minors. I was assured their other program would look into it.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/27/2015 04:21PM by whiterosie.
I thought the audit reports were for the client they mystery shop and do separate audits for. They were saying their mystery shoppers were missing items that their auditors were finding, such as issues at the pump where the mystery shopper pumped their gas.
Well, my very first gas station with photos audit that I ever did I did two days in a row because I failed to get the inside register receipt. So you could always just say, "Maybe the first auditor missed something they were supposed to check so they needed it done again so the report would be complete." That shifts the focus off whatever the station did wrong and puts it on maybe the shopper did something wrong.
Whatever you do, you don't want to get into speculating about the station. A simple, "They may have missed one of the pumps the first time through so I will be extra careful" should be enough.
But it's silly for them to fuss about "going through this again" because other than answering a few questions, it's the auditor who is going through this again, not the manager. All he has to do is sign a piece of paper saying yes you were there.
Methinks he protests too much. Which may have a lot to do with why he got reshopped.
Whatever you do, you don't want to get into speculating about the station. A simple, "They may have missed one of the pumps the first time through so I will be extra careful" should be enough.
But it's silly for them to fuss about "going through this again" because other than answering a few questions, it's the auditor who is going through this again, not the manager. All he has to do is sign a piece of paper saying yes you were there.
Methinks he protests too much. Which may have a lot to do with why he got reshopped.
Time to build a bigger bridge.
I always print my Letter of Authorization in color.
I agree with the others who disagree with the OP. I don't know why the OP thinks it is okay to NOT follow the guidelines clearly written in black & white (or color if you choose to print in color!) By performing a white glove inspection, the OP is being dishonest to the MSC and the client.
As for two audits close together, I agree with the others who stated that it could be a reshop for many reasons. How about blurry photos or a bad memory card? It happens. Or maybe one of the shoppers did not pay attention to the date range and performed the shop on the wrong date. It happens.
As far as the feces smeared all over the toilet; it is usually a sign of someone with a mental disorder. I forget which disorder but people with that particular ailment seem to have a thing for smearing feces on toilets, walls and floors. @#$%& happens!
As for two audits close together, I agree with the others who stated that it could be a reshop for many reasons. How about blurry photos or a bad memory card? It happens. Or maybe one of the shoppers did not pay attention to the date range and performed the shop on the wrong date. It happens.
As far as the feces smeared all over the toilet; it is usually a sign of someone with a mental disorder. I forget which disorder but people with that particular ailment seem to have a thing for smearing feces on toilets, walls and floors. @#$%& happens!
They are pretty clear about what constitutes a violation and what doesn't. A pattern of neglect is obvious (like a buildup of cigarette butts outside the building) and very different from some azz dumping out an ash tray. I wouldn't let it get me paranoid. I always do the best job I can anyway.
I have had that happen twice last month. One attendant said he was shopped a "couple of weeks" ago and the other a "couple of days" ago. They were both in remote areas and were bonused and usually stay on the boards for some time so I was surprised to hear of the other shoppings. One of them showed me a black and white LOA (maybe that was yours jilummer) that the other shopper left and the owner/manager complained that he had to pay $50 for each inspection. First time I heard of that. At first he didn't want to let me do the audit but when I told him I would be happy to leave and that I would just indicate that he refused the inspection, he relented. There were some infractions but nothing serious. The second attendant said he didn't care if we came every week.
In both cases, I did my normal inspection. I can't worry about what another shopper finds or doesn't find or if the stations really are being inspected more than once a month. I try to be consistant.
Something seems to be going on with the Exxon/Mobil inspections and perhaps someday we will find out.
In both cases, I did my normal inspection. I can't worry about what another shopper finds or doesn't find or if the stations really are being inspected more than once a month. I try to be consistant.
Something seems to be going on with the Exxon/Mobil inspections and perhaps someday we will find out.
I also have an Exxon location I shop and the last three times I've gone, the manager has said another auditor was there the previous week. She wanted to know why. I told her I had no idea why the company was sending out auditors so close together. I asked her if the LOA was the same and she said yes. (I also print mine out in color) This location never has any major issues, so it would be interesting finding out what the reason might be.
In the first quarter of 2015, there was a simultaneous EM project to count the number of perimeter poles, if the parking spaces were properly painted and if there was a working car wash among other questions with only one photo I believe. During that time period, there would be two different auditors but working on totally separate projects.
This past month, they have another EM project paying only $5.00. I didn't even bother to look at it. But that means that most likely, two different auditors would be visiting the same station in the same time period.
This past month, they have another EM project paying only $5.00. I didn't even bother to look at it. But that means that most likely, two different auditors would be visiting the same station in the same time period.
That is true Sybil but I have done inventory inspections as well as a loyalty inspection plus all the reular audits. They each have different LOA's. The LOA that the one station showed me was for the regular audit.
I'm guessing someone shopped the wrong location.
There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind
At the moment only demons come to mind
Or just used the same letter for all audits. I do that myself.
I was performing the mystery portion of my shop for this particular MSC (pumping the $5 of gasoline) when another patron walked over to me and asked if I knew where the next closest Pegasus shop was. I gave her the location and then wondered if she was auditing me or the same stations. I suppose I'll never know. I continued on with the audit, performing it as I always have - sans white glove, but objectively as instructed.
As for the latest Loyalty shops for Pegasus, I note the payment is $5 with reimbursement for the gasoline and in-store purchases. However, it seems to me that to purchase 2 of the 3 in-store items and leave them there, is rather costly.
Has anyone performed these?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/29/2015 12:27PM by Tatjana.
As for the latest Loyalty shops for Pegasus, I note the payment is $5 with reimbursement for the gasoline and in-store purchases. However, it seems to me that to purchase 2 of the 3 in-store items and leave them there, is rather costly.
Has anyone performed these?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/29/2015 12:27PM by Tatjana.
I did one, Tatjana and no more. The program wasn't fully set up so I couldn't get gas. The cheapest tobacco product was a pack of cigarettes for $12 and I was able to buy a bottle of beer for $2.25. Net loss including the $5.00 fee and $5.00 tobacco re-embursement was $2.00, and no free gas. The manager also said buying and returning a pack of cigarettes would mess up his inventory so, being a non-smoker, he gave them to one of his mechanics.
Too much time, not enough money and too much hassle. No thanks.
Too much time, not enough money and too much hassle. No thanks.
@LIJake wrote:
Something seems to be going on with the Exxon/Mobil inspections and perhaps someday we will find out.
I agree with you. In the case I talked about, the manager told me that these are the things that he was asked to do by the or saw done by the other auditor: Turn on all the building, perimeter and canopy lights, photograph the restroom, take a picture of the cashier from the neck down. So if that is true, then it wasn't an inventory shop. It's a good opinion that the auditor shopped the wrong address, but that's not true in this case, because what nobody knew is that there are only 2 Exxons in this small town and both were audited by the auditor the day before my audit.
I just thought that Exxon hasn't been happy with the quality of some auditors work, so the MSC is trying to catch the auditors not doing a good job. Since I know I do a good job, I thought that they wanted to use my audit to compare to the one done before me. These stations were a mess and there were a lot of infractions. I just was more careful not to miss anything. I guess I really didn't do a true white glove audit. I hope folks know what I mean.
I also think the MSC is comparing audits from different shoppers, perhaps for stations that had conflicting reports. They want accuracy and I can't blame them for that. I will continue to report as accurately as possible and let the chips fall where they may. If/when another CSR tells me someone from the MSC was recently there I'll do a little probing and find out when and what they checked.
For what its is worth, I received my May requested shops yesterday so I'll be out there again.
For what its is worth, I received my May requested shops yesterday so I'll be out there again.
Or another MSC is doing promos.
There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind
At the moment only demons come to mind
I did an Exxon where I was told I was the fourth person to come by in the past week. The owner was unhappy and only minimally cooperative. He complained about the electricity costs of turning on the canopy lights, and then proceeded to badmouth the MSC to one of his customers over the phone. I didn't even bother asking for a picture of his uniform, I just snapped the counter and went on my way. I'm pretty sure one of the visits was for the inventory. Another was probably someone shopping the wrong location, because the address was very similar to another Exxon on the same highway. The third was probably just someone screwing up, because the job had been taken by someone else and then reappeared on the board later.
I preformed several audits for E/M, either the manager was agreeable or did not voiced any opinion. I did informed him he had the right to refused the audit. The audit was preformed and I moved on.
I do not print a LOA in color unless it specifies it in the guidelines. It sounds like the manager is using the color LOA as a weapon of "who is being more truthful.........The color LOA or the black white LOA?"
We aren't the only people auditing GS. The State also audits and inspects these venues. What the MSCleint is probably doing is trying to save himself from a bucket load of State fines. If these fines are pass on to the Franchiser then he should be happy that we aren't as stiff or strict as the State inspectors.
I do not print a LOA in color unless it specifies it in the guidelines. It sounds like the manager is using the color LOA as a weapon of "who is being more truthful.........The color LOA or the black white LOA?"
We aren't the only people auditing GS. The State also audits and inspects these venues. What the MSCleint is probably doing is trying to save himself from a bucket load of State fines. If these fines are pass on to the Franchiser then he should be happy that we aren't as stiff or strict as the State inspectors.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.