Leaving Google Fi

If customer support is important to you, I heartily recommend giving Ting[1] a try. They're a T-Mobile and Sprint MVNO. Every interaction we've had with their customer service has been excellent. Last I called, there was no phone tree, just a person immediately picking up (hopefully it's still like this).

[1]https://ting.com/

The main problem with their stupid voting system is that they let humans press the buttons.

And what would those have changed? Do you believe that some EU consumer right agent would bust down the door at Google and get you your $70 and an apology for wasting your time?

Sure, you'll have a great time in court (as the OP would in the states, Google is clearly in the wrong here), but that doesn't help you in the slightest, because it's a lot of hassle, time and effort, you'll have to pay your lawyer up front etc pp.

As a former GCP support rep, this is actually true. Their strict hiring practices prevented them from scaling up support along with their platform, so they had to contract with other IT companies to provide the necessary manpower. Unfortunately, that also meant that Google's support was manned by people not up to Google's own standards. This started to change over the last year when they got sick of the lackluster support from their contractors, but I still doubt they are able to get enough Google qualified engineers willing to work in customer support. It's definitely not for a lack of trying, though. The problem is that if you're good enough to pass a Google whiteboard exam, wouldn't you rather build things, rather than coach other people building things? I sure did.

Wow! Good times. Almost tops my own worst experience which was with Avis car rentals. The author indicates that this kind of experience is probably due to systemic problems within Google's customer support program and I'd guess that's right.

I've noticed a pattern that many companies have adopted. First they silo the customer service division usually culminating in remotely locating the customer service frontline. They then cut ties between any part of the company and rank and file customer service workers, linking them only to their supervisors. In the final step the supervisors are prohibited from forwarding customers anywhere. Then customer service becomes like a separate company within the company. I've seen this structure over and over and the companies with the worst service always have this shape.

You call. You get a call center. They can't transfer you anywhere. You ask for a supervisor. They try to tell why you don't need one. You insist. You get one. The supervisor takes your call. You discover they can't fix your problem. You ask who can. They can't say. You ask if there's anyone else you can talk to. They say no. You ask for their manager. They say you can't talk to them. You ask for corporate level customer relations. They don't have that number. On and on and on...

My theory is that structuring customer service into such a separate silo actually breeds a combative relationship between customer service and company leadership. Without more contact between the people building and servicing the products and frontline customer support people, customer service just looks like a big fat cost center. No useful information makes it out (by design) and year after year it's just a big red line item for everyone else. Of course this leads to a perpetual push to decrease costs in customer service which leads to really regressive behavior. Too many customers are need free replacements tighten the grip on all comps. Too many high level customer support people are still giving things away. Get rid of any high level customer support personnel. Could we save money with less supervisors? Yes but the one's we've got are already overworked. Well, track the number of times an employee allows customers to escalate and create disincentives.

In this way customer service actual becomes the opposite of what it's meant to be. Instead of enabling customers or helping them it becomes a hindrance. It becomes a wall that protects the rest of the company especially the leadership from having to have any contact with the unwashed masses.