The End Of On-Hold?
By Takeoffeh.com - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - 1 Comment
New Airline Systems Call You Back
Getty Images
Airlines have wholeheartedly embraced a self-service culture that now sees customers book their own flights, print out their boarding passes, check-in at electronic kiosks and even in some cases print and attach their luggage tags.
But while passengers have adjusted to these commercial realities, one thing they don’t like – as evidenced in repeated surveys – is the old reality of being kept on hold to speak to an agent at the airline call centres.
As the New York Times reports, technology is now providing a solution to this problem. Dubbed VOH or ‘virtual on-hold,’ the feature allows callers to hang up and have a customer service representative call back when their number reaches the front of the line. It may not make the response any faster, but it beats having a phone stuck to your ear for hours.
Southwest Airlines added the feature to its customer service protocol last year and says it has been a success, both from a customer service perspective and because it reduces telecom costs. Canada’s WestJet also added the feature in 2009. “We implemented the VOH system last year when we were experiencing high call volumes during the Sabre transition,” says WestJet spokesperson Robert Palmer. The transition he refers to was a new reservation system last fall that resulted in online problems and drove passengers to the phone. “The VOH system is still in place today and we intend to keep it. It will kick in if the wait time is longer than two minutes,” Palmer says.
For its part, Air Canada told TakeOffeh that it doesn’t use the VOH system but is “monitoring developments” in the industry. As spokesperson Peter Fitzpatrick says, the airline is more concerned with giving passengers fewer reasons to use the blower. “We have been focused on online services that let people do things for themselves without calling the call centre. Our online rebooking, for example, lets people whose flights are cancelled rebook themselves on-line. It worked well during the volcano,” Fitzpatrick says.
-
Finally a U.S. energy bill—but will it pass?
By macleans.ca - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at 10:12 AM - 0 Comments
Canada watching for emissions cuts plan
Two U.S. senators, Democrat John Kerry and Independent Joe Lieberman, are set to unveil their long-awaited plan to limit greenhouse gas emissions today, but Washington is skeptical the bill has much chance of passing anytime soon. Their general idea is to promote clean energy by forcing reductions in carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels by creating what’s called a cap-and-trade system, first for power plants and, later, factories. Companies would obtain emission permits at a set price. The U.S. government would send two-thirds of the revenue from emissions permit sales back to consumers as refunds on their utility bills, in a bid to offset energy cost increases. Many details remain to be explained today.
-
Senators boogie on the dance floor at All-Party Party
By Mitchel Raphael - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at 9:15 AM - 7 Comments
The final All-Party Party organized by NDP MP Peter Stoffer packed 200 West Block. The building is scheduled for major maintenance and will be closed for years. Below, Liberal Senator David Smith (left) and Tory Senator Nancy Ruth take to the dance floor.
.
Liberal MP Siobhan Coady.
.
-
Paul Gross, Laureen Harper and a pack of Twizzlers
By Mitchel Raphael - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at 8:00 AM - 10 Comments
Heritage Minister James Moore hosted Ottawa’s premiere of Gunless, starring Paul Gross, at the Museum of Civilization. Below (left to right): Laureen Harper, Heritage Minister James Moore and Paul Gross.
.
Laureen Harper offers Justin Trudeau some Twizzlers.
-
To the brainstormery, my friends!
By Scott Feschuk - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at 8:00 AM - 17 Comments
Fellow citizens, we, too, have the means to make bread obsolete. Let’s do it for Canada.
Illustration by Adam Cholewa
KFC’s new Double Down—a bacon-and-cheese sandwich that features two pieces of fried chicken in place of the traditional bun—has been described by nutritionists as an affront to human health, by scientists as a potential contributor to childhood obesity and by Kirstie Alley as a mfwwwwa ahhhsdfldnf. (Her mouth was full.)
I, for one, have found a completely different reason to be outraged about the Double Down: we can’t buy one in Canada.
-
’500 ways to say no’
By Jonathon Gatehouse - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at 8:00 AM - 7 Comments
Canada’s Access to Information program is in shambles. Here’s why.
John Woods/CP
On Feb. 10, Vic Toews, Canada’s minister of public safety, convened a working dinner at a Milestones restaurant in Ottawa. One government employee and three other people were in attendance. The total bill was $85.04, including tip. We’re not sure exactly who was at the table, what was discussed, or even whether the minister’s tastes run toward classic fare like Prime Rib Beef Dip, or the menu’s internationalist offerings à la Spicy Thai Chicken Drummettes. But thanks to a policy enacted by the previous Liberal government mandating the “proactive disclosure” of hospitality expenses for ministers and senior staffers—the amount, the number of people, sometimes the venue, but nothing else—Toews’s fondness for chain eateries is now on the record. Interesting, but a minimal contribution to the public interest.
-
Senator launches book
By Mitchel Raphael - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 10:25 PM - 0 Comments
Liberal Senator Bill Rompkey (below) held a book launch on the Hill for St. John’s and the Battle of the Atlantic, which he edited.
.
Tory Senator Nancy Ruth.
-
The Dukes of the Statusphere
By Andrew Potter - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 5:57 PM - 19 Comments
Is there such thing as the democratization of snobbery?
The very excellent Misty Harris (follow her on Twitter, she’s great) has a piece today about a new trendwatching report that purports to be a look at the changing nature of status markers. Apparently status-seekers are moving away from the standard forms of conspicuous consumption (car, house, jewelry, clothes, electronics, etc.), into a new “statusphere” that “includes everything from a person’s eco- credentials to their number of Facebook friends and knowledge of local restaurants. Think of it as the democratization of snobbery.”
Well I don’t know about that. If there’s one idea that can be refuted from your armchair, it’s the idea that status can become democratic. But what is true is that there has been a shift, though it isn’t entirely new. In fact, it is just the shift chronicled in chapter 4 of the Authenticity Hoax, where people now seek status through various forms of conspicuous authenticity.
The best quote in Misty’s piece is from professor June Cotte, who says: “There’s some indication that the wealthy feel guilty about having so much, and that in the face of massive unemployment, they shouldn’t be showing off the biggest diamonds or newest Mercedes.”
That’s true. But it hardly means that the the wealthy have stopped exploiting their privilege. At least everyone”s money is the same colour, even if some have a lot more of it than others. But when status becomes less about what you have, more about who you know, that’s when it becomes truly pernicious. As marginalized groups have known for centuries, the first thing the elites do to preserve their status is cut off the mechanism for being able to simply buy your way in. That’s what has always motivated race-based bans for private clubs, or racial or religious quotas at universities.
And so the trendwatchers Misty is quoting get it exactly wrong. If anything, the turn away from conspicuous consumption has made status-seeking less democratic, not more.
-
My New Least Favourite TV Cliché
By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 5:52 PM - 1 Comment
Is the couple where one of the partners is reluctant to say “I love you.”
This cliché has been around for a while (it was used on Mary Tyler Moore at least once), though I think it only got really big during my lifetime. But while I’ve never liked it, I’ve pretty much grown to hate it lately, and last night’s episode of Chuck finally pushed me over the edge. I’m one of those people who tends to think that the decision to move in with a guy is a bigger decision for a character than whether to say one phrase that can mean a lot of things anyway, and is much easier to take back.
I don’t really get treating the words “I love you” as the most portentous magic words on earth, that can change a relationship forever. But I accept that in some relationships, it is a big deal and that some people prefer not to say it until they’re absolutely sure that it’s really love. The problem is that most shows seem to treat these three little words that way. It should say something pretty interesting about a character that he or she has trouble saying “I love you,” but instead it comes down to a simple duality: you say the words if you’re truly, truly sure it’s true love (usually the guy, like Leonard or Chuck) and you don’t say it if you’re not sure (usually the girl). What about all the other things you can do with the phrase, and what it means to have a character say it: like someone who says it casually, reinforcing how meaningless it can be? Or what about all the other signs, perhaps more significant ones, that a relationship is serious? It sometimes seems like “I Love You” has become a crutch, a quick and easy way to show how serious someone is.
I almost think the “I Love You” question makes more sense in the context of a long-term relationship, like that of a married couple. It worked on Everybody Loves Raymond because the point of that episode was not that Ray had never said it, but that he never said it anymore — which is something that is recognizable and plausible in a marriage. A lot more plausible, really, than in a couple that has just started getting serious.
-
The Commons: Yelling with purpose
By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 5:17 PM - 32 Comments
The Scene. It was a full 25 questions today before anyone referred to Helena Guergis, before any of Pat Martin or John Baird or, sometime later, Marlene Jennings got involved. And then, yes, there was a reference, from the aforementioned Mr. Martin, to crucifixion. But that there had been a full 25 questions before we came to this point, surely counts for something.
This was indeed, in various small ways, a remarkable day. Daniel Paille and Jim Flaherty entertainingly sparred over securities regulation. Mr. Flaherty and John McCallum very nearly yelled each other hoarse over taxation policy. There were two questions about the potential for train traffic through downtown Toronto.
That it all began with David McGuinty, the booming Liberal backbencher, might not have particularly bode well. But then he seemed to have a question of some relevance. Continue…
-
Comedian Carol Burnett dishes
By Kate Fillion - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 5:15 PM - 3 Comments
On her secret benefactor, life at 77, her younger husband—and how she can’t tell a joke to save her soul
- Chris Haston/NBCU Photo Bank
In This Time Together, her new memoir, the star of The Carol Burnett Show—who once planned to be a writer—reflects on her career, her family, and Hollywood friends such as Julie Andrews and Cary Grant.
Q: You had a birthday last week. But inside, do you feel 77?
A: No! It’s funny, I was having a little lunch with some lady friends in Santa Barbara, and we went around the table and everybody had to say how old they felt. I said, “Eleven.” -
The mother Parliament
By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 3:57 PM - 42 Comments
As Britain embarks on—dear lord, no!—coalition governance, Chris Selley attempts to draw lessons.
In short, what we’re seeing in Britain this week is a wakeup call. Canada has been playing Parliament in “beginner” mode. It’s in everyone’s best interests, I think, to give “intermediate” mode a try. I fail to see how it could make things worse.
-
Gordon Brown resigns; David Cameron takes over
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 3:20 PM - 1 Comment
Britain gets a Conservatives/Lib-Dem power-sharing government after 13 years of Labour rule
It’s official: British Prime Minister Gordon Brown handing over the reins to Conservative leader David Cameron, who won the most votes in last week’s election but failed to net a majority. “I have informed the Queen’s private secretary that it’s my intention to tender my resignation to the Queen,” said Brown. Soon after, Cameron announced he’ll be forming a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats. The Tories are returning to power after 13 years of Labour Party rule. But Cameron admits that this new arrangement will could “pose all sorts of challenges.” Even before the agreement had been made official, rumours that it was coming prompted a one per cent jump in Britain’s sterling currency.
-
Another Show Paul Haggis Used To Write For
By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 3:16 PM - 0 Comments
Sorry for not having a real post up; here’s a Filler Clip(tm) to demonstrate why the Marmaduke movie is doomed: because it doesn’t have Scatman Crothers singing about him. His absence will also spell disaster for the Hong Kong Phooey movie. I never saw this show, but I’m surprised that the song is actually somewhat clever (“The hot dog cat and the pussycat hound”).
And here are the closing credits that prove Paul Haggis was one of the writers. But then he pretty much wrote for everything.
-
Can commitment be measured in the lab?
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 2:06 PM - 0 Comments
Genetic, psychological factors can influence relationship’s stability, experts say
A growing number of researchers are looking into the science of marriage and commitment, looking at biological factors that influence a relationship’s stability and even a person’s psychological response to flirting with a stranger, the New York Times reports. It seems some people may be more naturally prone to resist temptation, but both men and women can train themselves to stay committed. In one study, a Swedish biologist looked at 552 sets of twins to find out about how a gene relates to the body’s regulation of a bonding hormone called vasopressin, and found men who carried a variation in the gene were less likely to be married. Those who were married were more likely to have had serious marital problems. And studies from McGill University psychologist John Lydon have looked at how people in a committed relationship act when tempted. In one study, highly committed married men and women were asked to rate the attractiveness of members of the opposite sex in photos. When shown the photos again, and told they were interested in meeting them, they scored the pictures lower.
-
Ultrasounds: a reversible contraceptive for men?
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 2:01 PM - 39 Comments
Blast to the testes safely stops sperm production
Ultrasound could be used as a reversible contraceptive for men, according to researchers at the University of North Carolina, who say a blast to the testes safely stops sperm production for up to six months. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has provided $100,000 to push head clinical trials, the BBC reports, in hopes of offering a new method of birth control. “We think this could provide men with up to six months of reliable, low-cost, non-hormonal contraception from a single round of treatment,” lead researcher Dr. James Tsuruta said. “Our long-term goal is to use ultrasound from therapeutic instruments that are commonly found in sports medicine or physical therapy clinics as an inexpensive, long-term, reversible male contraceptive suitable for use in developing to first world countries.”
-
'These are the choices we've made'
By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 1:53 PM - 1 Comment
Seems Mr. Ignatieff’s performance at QP yesterday was a warm up for today’s speech in Mississauga.
In the next election, you will have a clear choice. On one hand, a Conservative government that offers further corporate tax cuts we can’t afford. On the other hand, a Liberal alternative that freezes corporate taxes, fights the deficit, and makes targeted investments in our future—learning, care, and leadership.
In the weeks and months ahead, we will work to earn your trust. We will make the case for change. We will make the case for a Canada where every child gets an equal shot, and every family a helping hand. A Canada that leads by example.
-
No more pardons for pedophiles
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 1:06 PM - 20 Comments
The feds move to close a dangerous loophole
The federal Tories have introduced sweeping legislation that will eliminate pardons for convicted pedophiles and other repeat criminals. Under the current system, sexual predators like Graham James—the notorious minor hockey coach who abused future NHLers Theoren Fleury and Sheldon Kennedy—can have their criminal records purged with a simple application, making it much easier to hide their past and sneak back behind the bench with children. The new law will close that dangerous loophole. “The current system of pardons implies that what the person did is somehow OK, or is forgiven, or that the harm done has somehow disappeared,” said Public Safety Minister Vic Toews. In fact, the term “pardon” will also be eliminated as part of the new law. Convicted criminals looking for a fresh start will now apply for a “records suspension.”
Source: Montreal Gazette
-
Quebec landslide: family of four missing
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 1:01 PM - 0 Comments
Five other houses evacuated
A family of four is missing after a landslide in a rural town northeast of Montreal, called Saint-Jude, which swept away a house and some cars. The huge crevice left behind meant five other houses had to be evacuated, CTV reports. The house that was swept away came to rest partially in a river; since then, no one has heard from the couple who lived there or their two children. Rescuers have moved to the side of the house after two prior attempts that were called off for safety reasons, and family members gathered nearby to wait for news. Official said counsellors are standing by, and the incident is under investigation.
-
Idea alert
By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 12:54 PM - 1 Comment
Perhaps the most beneficial and most affordable idea ever presented here: an end to political hackery.
If a single move could restore civility to politics, that is it. Get rid of the left-vs.-right commentators who are just out scoring points for their team. This sort of opinion-mongering is not only boring and predictable, it is destructive of the truth. If your only credentials are “GOP shill” or “Democratic hack,” you’ve no business cluttering up the airwaves or the op-ed pages…
Whom do we put in their place? I say replace the pundits with people who have genuine expertise — whether from their academic work, professional life or personal experience — on the key issues of the day. Instead of partisan talking heads or mad hatters from the “tea party” preaching their views on, say, health care and taxes, let’s hear from doctors and insurance professionals, or the number-crunchers from the Congressional Budget Office.
-
Civil war
By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 12:10 PM - 1 Comment
The government side returns fire.
Helena Guergis lied in her interview with CBC news anchor Peter Mansbridge when she told him she did not know the allegations that led to her abrupt departure from cabinet and removal from caucus, according to a series of Conservative talking points circulated to a select group of supporters and MPs…
“Ms. Guergis wasn’t telling the truth about not knowing the allegations,” their memo says. “She was told the specific allegations by the party lawyer. Remember, she issued a statement after being dumped from cabinet saying she denied ‘all of the allegations.’ How could she deny allegations she knew nothing about?”
-
Goodbye Hot Docs, Hello Cannes
By Brian D. Johnson - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 11:49 AM - 1 Comment
Juliette Binoche graces Cannes in Abbas Kiarostami's 'Copie Conforme'
I’m writing from Cannes, this otherworldy spot on the French Riviera that plays host to the mother of all film festivals. After the reality blitz of Toronto’s Hot Docs festival, now it’s time for some serious fantasy. The hoopla begins tomorrow, with the premiere of Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood, or Robin des Bois as it’s known here. I expect nothing less than venison kebabs on flaming arrows at the opening night party. It wasn’t easy to get here. My plane had to circumnavigate some volcanic ash, adding hours to the trip and screwing up connections. Unless you think I’m complaining, or (worse still) gloating, about this hardship assignment on the Riviera, let me reassure you that I feel lucky to be here, and humbled. Cannes does that to you—even the stars feel humbled at the high altar of cinema. And if it’s any solace, it’s cool and cloudy in paradise, and front-end loaders are working to repair the beaches, which have been ravaged by Mediterranean storm surges. Hey, it’s no earthquake, but that’s what passes for catastrophe in these parts, aside from the Greek meldown—I keep waiting for the Euro to crash, but so far a cup of coffee in Cannes is still the price of breakfast back home. Not much changes. There’s always a mignonne French woman of a certain age with a fake tan and a miniature dog strolling down the Croisette past a yacht called Octopussy.
Juliette Binoche, the Official Cannes poster,
Juliette Binoche is ubiquitous here. She’s literally the Cannes poster girl, adorning the festival’s official affiche, which is unusually garish. She also stars in a competition entry by Iranian master Abbas Kiarostami–a Tuscan romance that takes her back to English Patient territory. Talk about world cinema: an Iranian auteur makes a romance about an English writer who takes a young French woman to Italy. I’m curious.
In preparing for Cannes, I never had a chance to wrap up coverage of Toronto’s Hot Docs festival, which closed on the weekend. It was the richest Hot Docs on record, and proof that the documentary is thriving as never before. Glad to see the jury awarded its $15,000 prize for best Canadian feature to In the Name of the Family, by Shelley Saywell, a searing investigation into the murder of teenage girls by family members in so-called honour killings. Continue…
-
Wanna buy a 'bespoke' suit real cheap?
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 11:14 AM - 1 Comment
Shears out on Savile Row over mis-use of the word
Savile Row tailors are in a tizzy after a mid-market British clothing chain announced its plan to offer “bespoke suits” to the masses. The Telegraph reports that the heart of Britain’s tailoring industry is “up in arms” over Moss Bros.’ plan to market “bespoke” made-to-measure suits for £250 to £350 ($380 to $530). It’ll take a customer’s measurements, allow him to pick from various fabric and style samples then ship the material to China where the suit will be made and delivered in four weeks. This practice runs contrary to the definition of “bespoke” as practiced by the famed London street’s tailors, said Martin Henderson chairman of Savile Row Bespoke: material has to be individually (rather than machine) cut, a customer needs three fittings, the garment must be hand-crafted under the supervision of a Master-Cutter, and the suit, which costs £3,000 ($4,500) on average, must be made within 100 yards of Savile Row. “It is a sad prostitution of the word ‘bespoke,’” says Henderson, who also admits it’s “not a bad” business idea from Moss Bros.’s point of view.
-
Civil liberties shocker!
By macleans.ca - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 11:07 AM - 4 Comments
Obama “open” to changes in the Miranda rights
A top White House advisor said that President Obama is “open” to Attorney General Eric Holder’s call for a new law allowing interrogators to question terrorism suspects for lengthy periods without informing them of their rights. In an interview on CNN, David Axelrod said the president was willing to look at changing the Miranda rule, which generally bans prosecutors from using as evidence statements made by suspects in custody before they have been told that they have a right to remain silent and to consult a lawyer. The idea, which has drawn fire from civil libertarian groups, and even Obama himself, comes at a time when the Administration has been under fire for treating some terrorism suspects—including United States citizens arrested on United States soil—as criminal defendants rather than as military detainees under wartime rules.
-
The faculty feud
By Chris Sorensen - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 10:37 AM - 4 Comments
Inside the nasty battle at McMaster’s business school
Photograph by Cole Garside
Faculty members at McMaster University’s DeGroote School of Business in Hamilton are fond of telling a story about a student who, several years ago, interrupted a professor mid-lesson with a question about something in his organizational behaviour textbook. The student had flipped ahead to chapter four and spotted a case study about an ugly battle between employees at Charles Schwab Canada and the company’s chief executive, Paul Bates. The page featured a large photo of Bates leaning over an employee’s cubicle in the middle of the discount brokerage’s Toronto offices. The student immediately recognized the face of the school’s head administrator and asked, “Hey, isn’t that the dean?”
Indeed it was. The case study, based on a 2002 Financial Post column headlined “Slick salesmanship masked discontent,” blamed Bates for the revolt at the discount brokerage—a dozen employees sent a letter to Charles Schwab’s head office warning that management of the Canadian arm was “no longer acting in the best interest of ourselves or our clients”—and suggested Bates should have been fired as a result (instead, he oversaw the sale of the brokerage firm to Scotiabank). Bates, who declined to be interviewed for this story despite repeated requests by Maclean’s, was named dean of McMaster’s business school two years later.
