Winnipeg Construction VIII

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Winnipeg did a big call center push in the 90s. Challenge is a lot of those jobs are "minimum wage" jobs (aka with a dollar or two of actually minimum wage). The biggest challenge in the 90s was the largest group treated people really poorly and had an incredible burn rate where people would often go in, work six months and be gone, mostly at the employers direction as they tried to adjust staffing levels to meet call demand.

If this is to be something more long term and sustainable it will need employers to value their staff and being willing to pay more a middle class wage to retain staff.

Definitely true but Shaw is a great company to work for that treats it's employees very well. Know lots of people that work there and love it. They also want to get out of the broadcasting business very soon (look for them to sell most of their Canwest channels in the near future) and strictly do services, much higher margin/lower risk. They're expanding pretty quickly out east too so they'll need more support staff.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ I think a lot of the 90s stuff involved sales and other functions that involved little or no training or expertise, while this kind of somewhat specialized tech support and account management is a notch above that on the call centre ladder... not exactly big money Silicon Valley type stuff, but it's the kind of gig that pays a living wage as opposed to the old school 90s call centres where people were churned quickly as you point out.

Thanks simplicity for remembering the name. Convergys at one point was a significant tech support call centre for AT&T's dial up Internet business at the time. This was strictly incoming calls that required some level of skill and not the same as the outbound Canadian long distance operation they also ran. On the tech support side they would have waves too, say the service was doing a big launch in a new market, they would then staff up for their eight week rollout period. At the end of the eight weeks they would magically no longer have the highest paying "tech support" jobs but had openings in in bound sales that staff could move into. Once you committed to the in bound job you could not apply for an internal transfer back to tech support for something like three months. Wouldn't you know it that after those commitments where made the next week they "suddenly" discovered they needed more tech support employees. Add in that they got to a point where they didn't do direct hires anymore and instead had a staffing agency funneling people into them. Yes, it was a very undesirable place to leave which is why they ended up having a huge burn rate even on the tech support side.

As for Shaw, they have long been working to divide their business interests. Prior to the Canwest acquisition they had moved their broadcasting side into their controlled subcompany Corus. Due to certain regulatory issues it seems that they cannot fully move Canwest into Corus. It likely comes down to the number of channels a cable company can carry from a source they control. Keeping Canwest and Corus separate would seem to avoid triggering that rule. The challenge is there are basically three players in the cable channel space in Canada: Rogers, Shaw and Bell. If you step over the threshold on your own channels you need to pickup more from the competition. Currently most cable systems are running pretty close to the maximum channels they are legally, not technically, allowed to carry.

Further, it would seem that Shomi, which Shaw runs with Rogers, is basically a test phase of moving towards a complete virtual cable system over the Internet instead of the style we have now. Once they have the details worked out it will be pretty seamless to customers. Bell was also invited to the Shomi party but exited late in the planning stages to spin up their own similar service, CraveTV.

[LilZebra]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Winnipeg did a big call center push in the 90s. Challenge is a lot of those jobs are "minimum wage" jobs (aka with a dollar or two of actually minimum wage). The biggest challenge in the 90s was the largest group treated people really poorly and had an incredible burn rate where people would often go in, work six months and be gone, mostly at the employers direction as they tried to adjust staffing levels to meet call demand.

If this is to be something more long term and sustainable it will need employers to value their staff and being willing to pay more a middle class wage to retain staff.

My experience with call centre type work was in 2012 where I worked for 6 hrs. at iMarketing/Xentel and also had an interview and tour of the one at Main @ York.

I saw workers different from me. Reptilian-Humans. People who are ruthless psychopaths.

Needless to say, I don't fit in with those kinds of people.

Three yrs. later, iMarketing operates in Portage Pl. and the one at Main @ York is still where it was.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by jimj_wpg

I saw workers different from me. Reptilian-Humans. People who are ruthless psychopaths.

Sounds kind of unpleasant!

[buzzg]

Yeah CoryB the whole Shomi/Crave thing is interesting. Rogers/Shaw realized that lots of ppl want internet video as an alternative to cable, not an addition. They're opening up to all very soon while Bell said they have no plans to offer Crave as a standalone. It's also interesting that Shaw sold their wireless spectrum a few years back. In talking to those Shaw reps, they said that the company wasn't willing to spend the billions it would take to start up a wireless division, but it could be a huge problem for them going forward as wireless is the future, and all their competitors have bundling options. The new MTS Total Internet plan is a game changer and is going to force a lot of prices down, first all-device internet plan in north america i believe.

Sorry, we're off topic now hah.

[h0twired]

Originally Posted by esquire

Sounds kind of unpleasant!

Sounds like someone off their meds.

[1ajs]

[DLLB]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

Great picture 1ajs

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Yeah CoryB the whole Shomi/Crave thing is interesting. Rogers/Shaw realized that lots of ppl want internet video as an alternative to cable, not an addition. They're opening up to all very soon while Bell said they have no plans to offer Crave as a standalone. It's also interesting that Shaw sold their wireless spectrum a few years back. In talking to those Shaw reps, they said that the company wasn't willing to spend the billions it would take to start up a wireless division, but it could be a huge problem for them going forward as wireless is the future, and all their competitors have bundling options. The new MTS Total Internet plan is a game changer and is going to force a lot of prices down, first all-device internet plan in north america i believe.

Sorry, we're off topic now hah.

Didn't shaw spend a substantial amount of money on infrastructure for wireless services a few years ago and then abandon their plans?

I can't agree with the post above that said internet is cheap. Shaw had the nerve to raise their monthly rates AND lower their speeds earlier this year. In other words, we will charge you more for shittier service. Canada really gets screwed compared to the most of the first world countries by our telecoms.

Talk deviating into the call centres reminds me of Faneuil, later called Inspyre. The company was given a $17 million tax break and a $50 million contract with MTS back in '94 to lure them to Winnipeg. Following several years of under-performing, the company had undergone restructuring with the province replacing the government loan in exchange for millions in preferred shares and commitments for Faneuil to maintain its executive and head office in Winnipeg in addition to operating at a level not less than 400 jobs in the province.

For the last several years that the company operated, they broke their commitment of a minimum of 400 jobs within the province before closing down in 2010 or 2011 for good. To the best of my knowledge the province recouped little or none of their investment. Nice due diligence on the part of the province!

I wonder who the hell is on the committee or whatever organization that determines which Manitoba companies are the best to work for? Convergys made the list a few years before they closed shop.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Didn't shaw spend a substantial amount of money on infrastructure for wireless services a few years ago and then abandon their plans?

I can't agree with the post above that said internet is cheap.

Yes shaw sold the spectrum they bought to WIND.

And I was referring to wireless specifically being cheaper in Manitoba. Canada has the highest internet prices is the world, but Manitoba and Sask are by far the cheapest within that, thanks to MTS and SaskTel.

I just bought a new Rogers contract. IT's $65 a month for everything you need with 5 gigs... that EXACT same plan is $105 everywhere else in Canada.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by buzzg

The new MTS Total Internet plan is a game changer and is going to force a lot of prices down, first all-device internet plan in north america i believe.

The Total Internet plan is less of a game changer than it first appears. If you opt into that plan you also, in most case, are opting out of the existing bundle discounts. If you only have wireless and high speed Internet it is likely a slightly better position where if you have other services from MTS you could find similar deals already. I personally ran the numbers and optimized them as much as I could to favor MTS and for my own services it would cost me a few bucks more a month to be on Total Internet compared to my existing, non-discounted, in-market consumer service plans.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by CoryB

The Total Internet plan is less of a game changer than it first appears. If you opt into that plan you also, in most case, are opting out of the existing bundle discounts. If you only have wireless and high speed Internet it is likely a slightly better position where if you have other services from MTS you could find similar deals already. I personally ran the numbers and optimized them as much as I could to favor MTS and for my own services it would cost me a few bucks more a month to be on Total Internet compared to my existing, non-discounted, in-market consumer service plans.

If you use (or want to use) a lot of wireless data, it will be a huge savings as you're allowed 15 gb wireless before they slow your speed.

[buzzg]

For some reason I can't find the Metro article online, but after the city rejected Independent Jewellers on Notre Dame's plan to level the existing building and build a new one at the back of the site with parking in front, they appealed, and — against planning department's recommendation, again — they won.

The secondary plan for that area requires streetfront retail, except I guess when the business "has roots in the neighbourhood." I'm curious what other people think, as the owners cited safety as a concern, which is fair considering how many cars have gone thru the wall, but that raises the thought of: a) just set the building back a couple feet, add poles?; b) maybe the city needs to address the design of the intersection.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by buzzg

For some reason I can't find the Metro article online, but after the city rejected Independent Jewellers on Notre Dame's plan to level the existing building and build a new one at the back of the site with parking in front, they appealed, and — against planning department's recommendation, again — they won.

The secondary plan for that area requires streetfront retail, except I guess when the business "has roots in the neighbourhood." I'm curious what other people think, as the owners cited safety as a concern, which is fair considering how many cars have gone thru the wall, but that raises the thought of: a) just set the building back a couple feet, add poles?; b) maybe the city needs to address the design of the intersection.

Normally I'd be dead set against an application like this, but in this case Independent Jewellers is clearly not doing this just to be difficult, as cars have plowed into the corner of their building with alarming regularity through the years.

What could the City do to fix the intersection, though? Maybe put bollards on the corner? But I'm guessing that would increase the risk of death to drivers who get hit by red light runners. The only real fix would be to make Notre Dame a two-way, and that is unlikely to happen.

This one is tough. Force IJ to build up to the corner and it's virtually guaranteed that there will be more cars smashing into the corner of the building.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by esquire

Normally I'd be dead set against an application like this, but in this case Independent Jewellers is clearly not doing this just to be difficult, as cars have plowed into the corner of their building with alarming regularity through the years.

What could the City do to fix the intersection, though? Maybe put bollards on the corner? But I'm guessing that would increase the risk of death to drivers who get hit by red light runners. The only real fix would be to make Notre Dame a two-way, and that is unlikely to happen.

This one is tough. Force IJ to build up to the corner and it's virtually guaranteed that there will be more cars smashing into the corner of the building.

I am dead set against it... If the problem is that cars come flying into the building do you think it's going to be any different when it's a parking lot? The only difference is they will hit cars instead of the building. The safety concern has nothing to do with the building or what is located at the corner, it has to do with the shitty design of the street.

We shouldn't allow this to happen because of "safety". It won't change the fact that cars drive too fast and slam into the building (or parking lot when this changes).

Just to be the other side of the coin -- Allowing IJ to build away from the property line virtually guarantees that there will be cars smashing into the parking lot.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

I am dead set against it... If the problem is that cars come flying into the building do you think it's going to be any different when it's a parking lot? The only difference is they will hit cars instead of the building. The safety concern has nothing to do with the building or what is located at the corner, it has to do with the shitty design of the street.

We shouldn't allow this to happen because of "safety". It won't change the fact that cars drive too fast and slam into the building (or parking lot when this changes).

Just to be the other side of the coin -- Allowing IJ to build away from the property line virtually guarantees that there will be cars smashing into the parking lot.

From a safety standpoint, you can probably do more to mitigate the risk with a parking lot, by planting trees and shrubs, having a landscaped area that would slow down an errant car before they smash into parked cars.

With a building, you're going through the walls/glass and that's that. And if someone happens to be on the other side, then too bad for them. I have heard of enough accidents reported on that corner that I get a bit nervous near the SE corner of the building when I'm inside IJ. I sure wouldn't want to work those display cabinets knowing that a car could come through any time as they have in the past.

Normally I would be fine with saying no to IJ, but the poor safety record of this corner justifies an exception. The only other corner I can think of where cars smashing into buildings is so common is at Tache and Marion, where the building at the SE corner of that intersection gets schmucked every few years. There may be others, but those two corners are easily among the worst. I just don't see what can be done with this intersection of Isabel and Notre Dame to make it safer... making Notre Dame two-way could have an impact, but I just can't see the city making such a dramatic change that would affect rush hour traffic.

[buzzg]

Yeah it's definitely a tough situation, but I didn't really appreciate the owner's little quip about saying "we could just as easily move the store somewhere else" as some sort of threat. There are probably a few safety things the city could do like extending the yellow, increasing the time that all lights are red, longer delays after turn signal stops and other direction gets a green.

[The Unknown Poster]

SHAW decided to focus on Wi-Fi over wireless.

Convergys was a joke. I worked their briefly before finding a better gig. In our training, the trainer launched into a tirade one day about how lucky we were to work there and if it wasnt for Convergys we'd all be flipping burgers. Really insulting. There were people in the room with degrees that were between jobs or down on their luck.

I worked on the Bell campaign and we were off loading customer service over-seas. Customers were irate. Convergys did this weird psychological thing with its employees. They were really strict and yet it was such a joke to work there. I actually stopped showing up for two weeks when I found another job and they didnt even realise I hadnt been there. They try to convince you you need them more than they need you.

When I did the exit interview the debate came down to pay. They compare themselves to places like Ipsos and say "we pay $1 more". But on my campaign the work was more comparable to MTS and SHAW which paid a lot more. And thats all convergys was, a training ground for SHAW and MTS.

[CoryB]

The part I do not like about the Independent Jewelers plan is moving off Notre Dame for a front access parking lot. I think a reasonable compromise might have been allow them to move off the corner with Isabel but still front onto Notre Dame. Have a specific setback at the corner designed to limit vehicle impact to the building while taking driver safety and visibility into mind. They could then have the parking in a lot off the corner setback but along the Isabel side and along the back of the building. Sadly, that won't happen.

[Authentic_City]

Sigh. Notre Dame is becoming an urban basket case. With the demolition of Luke's for a surface parking lot, the construction of the Hydro substation, and now this suburban style strip mall development, Notre Dame has pretty much crossed the Rubicon. If it ever was a vestige of pedestrian friendly urbanity, those days are certainly gone now. I love Wyatt's comments about this in the Free Press:

"Coun. Russ Wyatt (Transcona) said the parking and building layout "would fit into any suburban mall," and praised the owners for staying at that location."

Source: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/By-Aldo-Santin-310137681.html

Yup. That about sums it up.