Ain't that 'anywho' rather than 'anyhow'? Yes, I mostly get annoyed with an email that looks as though it is a cut and paste job from previous emails and ultimately ends up with due dates that have passed, bonus promises that are not substantiated and other odd mismatches. But ultimately there is a big of smug glee when a company that rides your report for spelling and grammar turns out so obviously erroneous prose themselves.

Obviously they are not editors and they don't get paid for good grammar (I always forget to use an a instead of an e!) and spelling and don't get docked for it.

I agree with everyone’s post, I am a scheduler for a MSC and I think the editors are too hard on the shoppers. As long as they complete their shop and submit it within 24 hours, I can care less about the mistakes. MS do not get paid enough to be criticized for their grammar. I use spell check and word religiously, because my grammar and spelling is not the greatest.

Keep this in mind, without you guys, we wouldn’t have a job. I treat my MS with respect and try to make their job easier. I enjoy my job, but I can’t stand to read emails from the editors to my shoppers. It’s hard enough to find shopper, I don’t want them running away. That’s why I try to edit my shops before they get a hold of them.

It's irritating yes, but it irks me far more to see an error in a book I'm reading. So much for proofing. They definitely need to implement that into sending out e-mails. I learned it in my high school yearbook class. I proof my text messages for Christ's sakes!

Txgirl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with everyone’s post, I am a scheduler for
> a MSC and I think the editors are too hard on the
> shoppers. As long as they complete their shop and
> submit it within 24 hours, I can care less about
> the mistakes. MS do not get paid enough to be
> criticized for their grammar. I use spell check
> and word religiously, because my grammar and
> spelling is not the greatest.
>
> Keep this in mind, without you guys, we wouldn’t
> have a job. I treat my MS with respect and try to
> make their job easier. I enjoy my job, but I can’t
> stand to read emails from the editors to my
> shoppers. It’s hard enough to find shopper, I
> don’t want them running away. That’s why I try to
> edit my shops before they get a hold of them.

Thank you so very much for the validation. I have lost two points with one company over "excessive use of commas" I have gripe part two from my end. One company waits for two weeks to a month to edit highly detailed car dealership assignments not realizing (or caring) that we have performed many assignments since. The edits are brutal and ask for details that have been clearly submitted in the report. To top it off, that company has recently lowered their fees. I feel for the schedulers who have to dance all around this and try to retain shoppers. The good MS companies strike a balance and see the bigger picture.

Has anyone ever noticed that some companies have grammatical and spelling errors on their websites? It seems to me like the companies that brag the most about how high their standards are for their shoppers are the ones who have the most errors on their websites.

-

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/02/2011 07:36AM by vince.

How about companies whose proprietary spellcheck apps don't contain common words like "voicemail" and "online" even though they're used right on the forms we complete?

A few spellcheck apps let you add words to a user library. Otherwise, you must repeatedly deal with the darned popups each time you save a page anew and spellcheck tells you about the same "misspellings".

Hello, GFK, are you listening?

One company waits for two weeks to a month to edit highly detailed car dealership assignments not realizing (or caring)--it's absolutely "not caring."

I received an E-letter 41 dys. after completing the report and was stunned, as never in my 8+ yrs. in the business had I been contacted more than a week after submission. To receive the fee I accommodated the editor, but I also mentioned in my reply that her request wasn't acceptable to me and have never applied for another car shop with that MSC. I did notice they had dropped the fee, which accompanies their pay period extension of a few yrs. ago.

Folks, as long as there're shoppers willing to work for a minuscule amount and under difficult circumstances, minuscule amounts and difficult circumstances are what they'll encounter.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/02/2011 02:41PM by shopperbob.

I was just wondering if you had a company that did that you, would you still work for the company? I had a company that's done this to me lately and have since left them. It became apparent to me that I couldn't please them, but they're sending me e-mails trying to get me back. I'm not sure what I should do.

There a couple who have clients I really like, so I continue taking those shops and just bite my tongue at the rest of the nonsense. Where I'm not wild about the clients either, I just ignore incoming emails.

The only proper response that occurs to me is the following.


"DOH!"

I once had spellcheck correct me on the word "coleslaw", I finally said to ignore it...how would you correct it. Not fair to deduct for a mispelled word, that's the editors job, what they get paid for.

Coleslaw ranks right up there with voicemail, website and online. If we adhered to that dictionary's database, we'd submit sentences like this:

"I called the restaurant and left a voice mail. I did not find a web site on line for them, so could not find out the calories for their cole slaw."


Irene_L.A. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I once had spellcheck correct me on the word
> "coleslaw", I finally said to ignore it...how
> would you correct it. Not fair to deduct for a
> mispelled word, that's the editors job, what they
> get paid for.

Received a "9" out of "10" today from an editor re: a car dealership assignment for capitalization errors. The instructions used a mix of capitals and small caps. for the word "Salesperson". I did the same. I wonder if sometimes editors feel obligated to find errors for purposes of job security.

I just got a 9 out of 10 because of the need for follow-up after a shop. They never e-mailed me or posted a question on their site for me to clarify.

I did provide follow-up because the shop required me to indicate whether or not the salesperson had contacted me within 72 hours after the shop.

So now they can dock your rating for following the directions??????????

I am certain that we are all talking about the same company whereas the editors are given way too much power and zero oversight. I hope that the schedulers are reading this and can use it to their advantage.

This whole thread reminds me of the discussion had with my landlord when I was renting from him. He was also an English Professor at a nearby college. I told him his life had no purpose.

There he is teaching English. If he succeed and his students could speak, write and dictate to their secretary, and the secretary could type it perfectly, and it was sent to someone who understood the language, and that person disagreed with the concept, it does not matter what is written in perfect English.

If an attorney gets their hands on it they will distort your perfect English beyond recognition and send you a bill!

I am told the only way to stop it is to bury all attorneys 12 feet deep. “Why 12 feet instead of the usual 6 feet deep?” you ask Real down deep attorneys are nice guys and gals.

Just joking, please do not send me hate mail. I am just here to entertain and inform. Makes you think!

This whole thread reminds me of the discussion had with my landlord when I was renting form him. He was also an English Professor at a nearby college. I told him his life had no purpose.

There he is teaching English. If he succeed and his students could speak, write and dictate to their secretary, and the secretary could type it perfectly, and it was sent to someone who understood the language, and that person disagreed with the concept, it does not matter what is written in perfect English.

If an attorney gets their hands on it they will distort your perfect English beyond recognition and send you a bill!

I am told the only way to stop it is to bury all attorneys 12 feet deep. “Why 12 feet instead of the usual 6 feet deep?” you ask Real down deep attorneys are nice guys and gals.

Just joking, please do not send me hate mail.

Shelly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just got a 9 out of 10 because of the need for
> follow-up after a shop. They never e-mailed me or
> posted a question on their site for me to
> clarify.
>
> I did provide follow-up because the shop required
> me to indicate whether or not the salesperson had
> contacted me within 72 hours after the shop.
>
> So now they can dock your rating for following the
> directions??????????



How about this one?

I got a request for clarification. Specifically requested was a description of the employee who was not wearing a name-tag. The problem was the description was supplied in the report. I supplied the information and included a PS telling the editor an uncommon word in my description triggered their site's spell checker program, which of course occurred when submitting the report.

So, yes, they can dock you if they don't read instructions or even the report itself.


DOH!

Piled Hip Deep, PHD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If an attorney gets their hands on it they will
> distort your perfect English beyond recognition
> and send you a bill!

Well, it should be "If an attorney gets his hands on it..." unless you know the attorney is a woman, then it's "If an attorney gets her hands on it..."

Your rendition implies the attorney has two heads! Maybe not inaccurate at all.
I am one of those that hates to see the language changing so much. It's inevitable I guess, but I still hate it.

KathyC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thank you so very much for the validation. I have
> lost two points with one company over "excessive
> use of commas" I have gripe part two from my end.
> One company waits for two weeks to a month to edit
> highly detailed car dealership assignments not
> realizing (or caring) that we have performed many
> assignments since. The edits are brutal and ask
> for details that have been clearly submitted in
> the report. To top it off, that company has
> recently lowered their fees. I feel for the
> schedulers who have to dance all around this and
> try to retain shoppers. The good MS companies
> strike a balance and see the bigger picture.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/11/2011 06:36PM by ccavazos.

Any more I do what I can and if it isn't enough well sorry fix it yourself. I've done all I can.lower my score At that point I really don't care.

Karen IL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Glabow wrote:
>
> "The teachers let them get away with it because
> they are a) lazy, or b) incompetent."
>
> Wow. That's a major generalization, wouldn't you
> say? As a teacher who is neither lazy nor
> incompetent, I take exception to that.
>
> By the way, you spelled "grammar" incorrectly in
> the last sentence.

I agree - generalizations are just bad news. We sometimes assume we know all about incentives and objectives of individuals - especially "groups" of people - so that when we make that type of statement, we're actually making what seems like a statement of fact about "those people" or "those types" so we end up type-casting an entire group b/c of what we've assumed about one, or several individuals. Thus, the seeds of bigotry and racism are planted and begin to flourish (an exaggeration in this case, for sure - but I'm trying to make a point as to where assumptions and generalizations can sometimes lead.) I often find myself doing the same - sometimes catch it in time - but usually not - and then realize in retrospect I was assuming all along, and didn't really even KNOW the half of it. Again! I recently did this big-time, right on this forum - then turned around and realized, too late, what I had done. So now I'm back on a kick of trying not to make assumptions about people and situations.

So, I've been trying to train myself (one again) to not assume anything. Does anyone know how impossible it is to abolish assumptions? In reality, it's nearly impossible - or so it seems, to me. The problem being, that if you knew you were assuming in the first place - you'd be alerted to the fact that you are actually creating a story that makes sense to you - "Well, they did this, or neglected to do THAT, so it must be because of this or that reason" - it seems to make sense to us - seems perfectly logical - even though we are taking into consideration possibly one-tenth of possible factors to explain the behavior - so we extrapolate from our little stories what we believe to be fact - and we go around repeating our assumptions as if they are fact. It's always so clear to me, in retrospect, that I've assumed something ONCE AGAIN! I think one might have to exist in a vacuum, or live the life of a monk in order to avoid assuming and generalizing.

Now, what was the original thread, here? I guess I assumed everyone was interested in generalizations with this thread... Oh, o.k., guess it was actually about poor spelling and grammar made by recruiters and schedulers. I assume that either (see? just did it again!), they just don't care, don't know, or are under so much stress to get the jobs filled, they don't have time to spell check or think about grammar and word usage. It does seem pretty ironic, though, huh?

What I find especially ironic - and just went round and round with an msc on this same subject, is the irony of being downgraded for a report, without the benefit of learning specific details for the downgrade. So, here's the thing - you are being asked over and over in your report to supply details on performance, especially with regard to a less than perfect performance - but the editor cannot, for some reason, take the time to provide you with any more than a brief generalization for a downgrade in your own report - , It could be this - or maybe it's that - we're just not going to tell you specifically why... but we DEMAND to know in minute detail exactly why you've downgraded the performance of your shoppee." (yes; a new word I just made up - won't find it in the dictionary!).

Another irony; the scheduler, editor, or some staffer in the msc who is RUDE to the shoppers. Isn't that what the msc wants us shoppers to watch out for - what the associate being evaluated w/b downgraded for? (among other issues) - those associates in the establishments we are shopping who are performing poorly because they are rude! So many ironies in this industry. Keeps life interesting though, I suppose.

Last weed for September - I received this email tonight. They did not have a proof reader?

I always thought schedulers and editors were ex-shoppers. If they are, how did they submit their own shops?

On the subject of teachers, my neighbour has three daughters who are elementary school teachers. I can't vouch for the accuracy of this since it is hearsay, but she told me teachers no longer have to pass any tests for spelling or penmanship before being awarded a teaching certificate. She said two of her daughters can't spell worth beans. If the teacher can't spell, how are the pupils going to learn?

For a good laugh about these all-too-common shortcomings in modern communications, try reading "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves" which is something I'm sorely tempted to do on some restaurant shops.

I received the same one. I laughed and wondered just What they had been smoking!! LOL

Dorisann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Last weed for September - I received this email
> tonight. They did not have a proof reader?