PUG member to join PN

I don't know the guy and I wish him well but I am curious that no one else sees any problem with this or do and haven't said anything.

This was a person who was put into a position to act on behalf of PN's customers, not elected and he did such a good job that PN offered him a job? Doesn't it seem more plausible that he acted in a manner with PN that they offered him a job?

I haven't seen anything that the PUG have achieved in concrete terms in the last 10 months on behalf of any customers by working with PN and when I read some months back that some had joined the PUG to improve their CV or gain employment with PN I dismissed it as a joke or a windup but this doesn't sit well with me.

Maybe this person feels they can do more for the customer from the inside than the PUG but perhaps I am too old and cynical about this but I sense a conflict of interest that has been ongoing with this person. Again, I don't know him and he might be the most honest person around but it smacks of smelly stuff to me.

Is this not the same chap that supported and wrote the article making statements into facts when the marketing director had his outburst here?

edit: I don't do conspiracy theories etc. and I am not suggesting the rest of the PUG are doing the same or even knew about this move so don't put words into my mouth please. I am talking about the rights and wrongs of this, if there is any, from your perspective.

Edited by rsharma (Wed 30-Aug-06 12:07:24)

"Is this not the same chap that supported and wrote the article making statements into facts when the marketing director had his outburst here? "

Yes

I would let him start and see how he does first, before we crucify him. I have known Liam for a long time, and although he is to a degree Plusnet orientated, i tbh have never seen him not stick up if something is wrong.

Like i say let him settle in first

Edited by soundsystem (Wed 30-Aug-06 11:51:09)

Oh blimey, the bloke has not even started his employment with PlusNet yet but he's under attack from the attack, attack mob!

In reply to:

---

Is this not the same chap that supported and wrote the article making statements into facts when the marketing director had his outburst here?

---

I think so

"I would let him start and see how he does first, before we crucify him."

I have no such intentions, I don't even know him and generally I don't make it personal.

I am very uneasy that someone that was supposedly representing the interests of the customers to PN has now got a job with them. Hence why I can't help but question whether in all the time he was representing the customers he did so in the best way or whether he had his own interests at heart and to get a job with PN first. This is about credibility.

George, feel free to join the discussion and debate instead of your usual posts but I will ignore you unless you have any posts worth a reply or debate and I will ask everyone else do the same.

Hi , this is why i've always thought the PUG was of more benefit to PlusNET than its customers.

Good Luck Liam

bs0d.

Come on guys, let Liam start. Perhaps he had a motive to get a job, but then perhaps he didn't. Only he knows and unless he tells us then we will never find out.
Also when taking on new employees, there is less risk if that person is known, so why shouldn't Plusnet look at taking on a member of PUG. It doesn't mean that his work in PUG was flawed or not in the customers interest.

TBH this seems like some people again using every opportunity to complain about something Plusnet have done, regardless of the reasons why and the implications of the moves.

>>>>>>>I don't even know him and generally I don't make it personal.

Well everyone lets keep it that way.

Who a company employs is ultimately their business. If an employee does something to you as a customer that you do not like you can take issue with it, ideally with the company, otherwise it has no place on the BBS.

Thread closed.