Compliance Statements from companiesgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I wrote to most of the organisations I have dealings with (banks, electric, water, insurance etc) round about the first quarter 98, about y2k most of them replied saying they aim to be compliant or finished coding by Dec 31 1998 (when else!). A few had earlier targets, an insurance company said they would complete "compliance verification" (whatever that means) by July 31 98, the water company said they would complete their "major Year 2000 program" by Sept 30 98. I have written to both recently asking them how they had got on. The insurance company is still testing, the water company has not replied after 6 weeks, even though the letter went directly to the "Year 2000 programme manager" instead of into the general bureaucracy. NB The company used to be nationalised. I am persistent, they will be pestered until they reply, the usual tactic in Britain when you complain is stonewalling, if they do reply eventually its usual ill-tempered (sign of the times over here). I'll be sending out a hell of a lot of reminders after Dec 31 1998! Anyone else doing the same?
-- Richard Dale (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 21, 1998
The British ill-tempered?! =:O ;)
The american companies are masters at the art of stonewalling, but when they do reply, it's in the sweetest, most reassuring lawyer dictated canned replies. After all, we are their "Most prefered customers", how else could they treat us! ;>
I've written to my electric utility (no response), GE's Y2K webmaster (he replied directing me to go on the home appliance section, which directed me to go to the Y2K's webmaster, same guy, I did and pointed that out, he didn't reply again), I wrote to the water company (no response). My bank said they were "compliant" when I called, and told me to look for the "details" in the upcoming monthly statement, which I recieved, but was a tipical boiler template. I will write a lot of letters this week. It's Y2K Action Week here in the US ;)
-- Chris (email@example.com), October 21, 1998.
Ok...I know I am opening a whole new can of worms, but I have to say it. What in the world good does it do you to have these letters from the companies? If you know for sure they are aware, and that they have a Y2K manager, leave them alone! They have a job to do and replying to your letter will not get that job done any faster. You all seem sarcastic when you get a form letter, do you expect them to take away from solving this thing to answer your letter I would hope not.
Now, that said, I have no problem with writing to a letter if the company has not announced they have a Y2K program. In that case youhave to make sure they are aware. But if they have an established Y2K program, it is publically known, then for all our sakes, leave them alone and let them get their job done.
-- Rick Tansun (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 21, 1998.
Rick, Don't you believe that public entities have an ethos which requires honesty and appropriate disclosure? Their services are often life sustaining and thus we have a vested interest in their progress. Just an honest q60 day report would be fine.
-- R. D..Herring (email@example.com), October 21, 1998.
Yes I would love 60 day reports, but think about the letter writing stuff. You have to figure that for every letter you write there are at least a few others doing the same to the very same orginization. All I would ask is that "indviduals" not write letters as much as you want to. I don't want anything hidden, honestly, I am just worried about how much time is being taken up replying to each of those letters. If you have the conveniance of belonging to a Y2K group I would love to see one letter written for the whole group, and no indvidual inside that group sending a letter. I am just concered about the economy of time & motion on the part of the Y2K teams.
-- Rick Tansun (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 22, 1998.
I have written to them in effect to remind them of their obligations to customers. Also to try and find out whether they are on target, if I get the impression they are not I will switch business if possible, or try to expose that fact to the press. If it is a monopolistic supplier I am of course stuffed, then the only recourse is to the press. As a result of writing to the local Council (local Gov. services), they have published a report in their latest news handout to the public (they are still testing!). They had not thought of informing the public beforehand. I realise the effect it may have on the y2k team but it is only a PR exercise as far as I'm concerned they should be doing it anyway. Suppliers (eg utilities) could for instance put a leaflet in the next bill or whatever you normally get.
-- Richard Dale (email@example.com), October 22, 1998.
Rick, if you think these companies are inundated with mail and phone calls about Y2K, guess again. I called our electric company a few weeks ago after they gave and 800 number about Y2K quetions. I asked if they had many calls about Y2k and she said no. You are not taking time from Y2K repairs by writing and calling. They have people on the payroll just for these purposes.
-- Dave (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 22, 1998.
Part of any "best practices" type Y2K plan for a business is to "contact your third party suppliers, vendors and customers and get in writing their status on Y2K". So, regardless, responding to these inquiries should be absolutely routine on the part of any business.
-- Jack (email@example.com), October 22, 1998.
Does anyone suppose that whoever might answer a letter on behalf of a company would be one of those working on Y2K (ie:a programmer)?
The people "doing the work" already must report to the PTB and all that a letter asks is the sharing of that information.
If a company will not do so honestly and promptly, then I believe that "there is something rotten in the State of Denmark".
-- Hardliner (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 22, 1998.
Well I guess I am just to big of a believer in fate then. I have not written one letter to any of my utilites or my local goverment as all of them had taken the time to do inserts, items in the paper or whatever. I follow a personal philosphy of "All Time Has Happened" (meaning, that our minds can only perceive this second, but to think that time & space have waited for us to perceive it is just not practicle...you have a lot of free time on your hands in a rural town), and no matter what a letter says, I am still going to prepare. So personally it does nothing for me, but from the responses I see that is just me.
-- Rick Tansun (email@example.com), October 22, 1998.
It ain't just you, seeing is believing. If everything is cool in March of 2000, I will be a believer, until then,
Then I saw her face, Now I'm a believer, Not a trace of doubt in my mind, I'm in love, I'm a believer, I couldn't leave her if I tried.
(You know who)
-- Uncle Deedah (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 22, 1998.
I think it is probably a prudent part of anyone's planning to ask the vendors that they rely on (as I do with my utility company, water company, and bank, among others) what steps they have taken and how effective they have been. It is up to me to interpret their responses but it does help me make more informed decisions regarding planning. For instance, water is the absolute most important necessity so I could get information from them that my supply would be less threatened, that would impact how I deal with the possibility of storing, etc. Awareness alone, on their part, doesn't give me the information I need to prudently plan for my family.
-- Melissa (email@example.com), October 22, 1998.