Tue, Sep 16, 2014, 11:46 AM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 4 hrs 14 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

AT&T, Inc. Message Board

cencoastsurfer 129 posts  |  Last Activity: Oct 4, 2012 11:31 PM Member since: May 16, 2002
  • I was terminated today. I am a contract employee, and i discovered something that was very unethical and potentially illegal that some company managers are doing. I reported the violations first to my contract manager. he followed up with the contract administrator. When I found more illegal doings that led to the VP in I and M, I was terminated. Funny, I worked for this company as an employee for 28 years, and retired with honors. I have been highly honest and have been a role model for integrity. Stealing is the one that I find appalling that a manager would do. Awarding contracts to family and friends bypassing the RFP process is a violation of corporate principles. This is what i found, and this is what i reported. Now I am paying the price for doing the right thing. It was reported to my contract manager that i am always late (I'm always early), that I don't follow instructions (I am a stickler for detail) and that I don't do my work (I have been commended by some area and district managers for the work I do). I can find some solace in all this though. It is time for me to move on. Honesty and integrity doesn't appear to be the company policy anymore. I am looking forward to some nice fishing, and some trips to the Sierra Nevadas. Right after I disconnect my ATT DSL, and go with Charter, and drop my ATT plan and move over to Verizon. Sometimes change is good

  • Reply to

    Age discrimintation permeates ATT HR

    by cencoastsurfer Jun 4, 2012 2:26 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jun 11, 2012 10:12 PM Flag

    forward it to me. On the public link, it's mostly door knocking jobs for Uverse, temp employees

  • Reply to

    Age discrimintation permeates ATT HR

    by cencoastsurfer Jun 4, 2012 2:26 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jun 11, 2012 10:11 PM Flag

    exactly

  • Reply to

    Age discrimintation permeates ATT HR

    by cencoastsurfer Jun 4, 2012 2:26 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jun 7, 2012 12:34 AM Flag

    It's age. No doubt. I think you have a good case.

  • Reply to

    Obama say's gay is OK -

    by k50cents May 11, 2012 12:12 AM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jun 5, 2012 3:46 AM Flag

    He's pandering for votes. He's never gonna make gay marriage legal. Not in this lifetime or on this planet

  • Reply to

    Pension underfunded

    by hart8804 May 26, 2012 7:38 AM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jun 5, 2012 3:45 AM Flag

    Randall is bullet proof. He did in a sense steal 4 billion dollars from T, and used it for personal gain. But in this day and age, CEO's who steal and lie and cheat are rewarded not punished, paid off not fired, and sometimes given bonuses for it. This is not longer the real world where people are held accountable for their actions. Randall is a 1%r, just like the President. They make the rules because they have all the money and they screw the common American

  • cencoastsurfer by cencoastsurfer Jun 4, 2012 2:26 PM Flag

    I just have to say this. I retired from ATT (early) 5 years ago. But the economic situation has forced me to look for work again. I applied for a job back with ATT, the exact same job I held for 8 years prior to retiring. I was notified by HR that I did not meet the minimum qualifications required to be selected for the position. I had all the correct buzz words in the resume, answered all the questions, and am "ready" to go back into the position and hit the ground running. Yet, I was not chosen. The only reason I could be chosen is age. I found out the person who got the position was a young person out of college with no experience at all. ATT is engaging in discrimination against potential candidates based on age discrimination

    That is all

  • Where do I find information such as this? Just trying to do a demographics

  • cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Dec 28, 2010 10:30 AM Flag

    Thanks, I have worked on PUC complaints before, and yes they were valid. SLA' are SLA's. They live north of Grass Valley. The cell coverage stops just outside of Grass Valley on Hwy 49. They live on the highway, but the trouble was in the f-2. Easy to find. Front pole lead, feeds out of a DPG.

  • cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Dec 28, 2010 10:26 AM Flag

    Sadly, you failed to do your job, and you know it. if you really understood the network, you would know the amount of HiCaps still existing in the copper network, and know that all the core MST's now shoot HiCap trouble because there is too much for special services to handle. In fact, the reason it was taken away from Special Services is because of the lack of response time. MSOC will identify all your shortcomings soon enough. Record? 1964 was a record year, 1983 was a record year and 1998 was a record year for Northern California. This year has not hit that level yet. Sorry, you don't close out tickets without repairing them. You need to stop doing that. It's not professional or ethical.

  • cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Dec 28, 2010 9:55 AM Flag

    No coverage there. No ATT, No Verizon. No Nextel, nothing.

  • cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Dec 28, 2010 9:49 AM Flag

    Sadly, this has not been a record year for rainfall in the area in question, and sadly closing out tickets without dispatching out on them is fraud. And sadly, if you had experiences 1983 and 1998, you would know this isn't even close to those years. I can tell you are young, inexperienced and unintelligent. The majority of the data network runs on t-1's. The fiber backbone is not that complex here. Please feel free to start doing the job you were hire to do rather than attack people here

  • It always amazes me when I read on this site about how "Cutting edge" and "advanced" att is. And then my 84 year old mothers phone goes out and I try to escalate it (I'm retired and therefore am now nothing more than a nuisance to att) and nothing gets done. I mean, her line is a simple pots line. Pots is the lowest form of telephone technology the company provides. And they have a Service Level Agreement that they are required by law to provide to the customers. So, 9 days. She called in on December 19th in the morning. She live in a rural area north of Sacramento. She was told it would take 3 days. Already att is admitting they cannot meet their requirements. So, she being patient, waited. 3 days comes and passes, and nobody comes. She calls in again, and is told it was cleared and they would created a new ticket. And another 3 day commitment. They tell here the rains are too great and the company is having trouble meeting commitments. Again, att is admitting failure. 3 days comes and goes, and still nobody comes, and the line is still out. By now I am involved because I can't reach her and I know there is something wrong with the line. I am told it's in a cable failure and they will fix it tomorrow. That was on Christmas Eve. On December 26th, mom calls in again and is told the ticket was closed because the trouble was cleared. She opened a new ticker (#3) and was told it would take 3 days. By now I have contacted a director in Service management I used to work with and she tells me there are "thousands" of pending trouble ticket. But she is able to call someone and get a maintenance splicer on it. On December 27, at 11:50, 9 days and 3 trouble tickets later and a 3rd level escalation, a simple posts is fixed. Now. do you trust this same company with your data networks?

  • Reply to

    is it worth my time applying to AT&T for a job?

    by investor952 Sep 25, 2010 6:14 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Dec 28, 2010 8:34 AM Flag

    I am over 50, a retired ATT 2nd level, and I applied for a position I was in for the last 7 years of my career and they "politely" told me i didn't meet the minimum requirements. ATT will not higher an older person. You will never prove in a court of law, but in management, they want younger, inexperienced people they can pay an extremely lower wage, work them 12 hours a day on a cheap salary, and hope they will quit before they get to retirement age. Seriously. ATT is no longer a service oriented company. They have no care for customers or employees. Once Ed left the company to his son-in-law, the company started spiraling to the bottom. Randall got his position only because of family, not because he can run a business. And he could care less about someone like you or me.

  • Reply to

    Bizarre Habits of The Extreme Right-Wing

    by lostcityundead Jun 16, 2010 4:33 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jun 16, 2010 8:10 PM Flag

    You seem to have intimate knowledge about this. Please don't share your experiences

  • Reply to

    Value Added Tax (VAT) Will Destroy The USA (Vid)

    by faustmanv Apr 8, 2010 1:51 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Apr 12, 2010 10:39 AM Flag

    Full of holes for the rich. Hum. You sound jealous

  • Reply to

    Here's What Republicans Support

    by archimedes1369 Mar 26, 2010 1:06 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Mar 26, 2010 3:06 PM Flag

    So that is what San Francisco, the city of refuge, does to American Citizens? It seems this is a San Francisco problem. And LW advocates support this kind of behavior in San Francisco

  • cencoastsurfer by cencoastsurfer Mar 9, 2010 4:32 PM Flag

    ATT wants to dump as much of the wireline business as possible. Right now they are cutting techs, and missing due dates. After April 2nd, many techs will be gone due to early retirement. Company is missing hundreds of orders today without the retirements. IMHO, Frontier will be able to buy parts of ATT's lucrative business in California before the year is out.

  • Reply to

    So whens your last day

    by tjm611 Jan 4, 2010 5:33 PM
    cencoastsurfer cencoastsurfer Jan 5, 2010 12:19 AM Flag

    Randall needs the billions in stimulus money to build his wireless network. He'll "sacrifice" thousands of jobs to line his pockets with taxpayer's money.

  • cencoastsurfer by cencoastsurfer Jan 5, 2010 12:10 AM Flag

    The Dump is coming. If T drops all it's wireline services, and they are still of 3g, will they lose out of billions of revenues just to dump the copper?

    In an historic public response to the US Federal Communications Commission's request for comments regarding its forthcoming National Broadband Plan, due before Congress on February 17, AT&T acknowledged not the forthcoming obsolescence, but the current obsolescence of the wireline telephone system. Without shame, it even applied the once-degrading acronym "POTS" (Plain Old Telephone System), interchangeably with "PSTN" (Public Switched Telephone Network), to refer to the one-time marvel of technology that defined its predecessor, the Bell System, in the 20th century.

    But the new AT&T went a huge step further than to denigrate its stepchild. In its filing dated December 21 and released Tuesday (PDF available here), the company called upon the Commission to begin consideration of a formal deadline for the transition of all wireline customers to a wireless system comprising broadband and IP-based connectivity -- refraining from referring to 3G or 4G services in a cellular context. AT&T's reasoning: Carriers can no longer afford to maintain the old network while simultaneously building out the new one.

    "It is accordingly crucial that the Commission pursue forward-looking regulatory policies that remove disincentives to private investment and encourage operators to extend broadband to unserved areas," writes AT&T's attorneys. "Any such forward-looking policy must enable a shift in investment from the legacy PSTN to newly deployed broadband infrastructure. While broadband usage -- and the importance of broadband to Americans' lives -- is growing every day, the business model for legacy phone services is in a death spiral. Revenues from POTS are plummeting as customers cut their landlines in favor of the convenience and advanced features of wireless and VoIP services. At the same time, due to the high fixed costs of providing POTS, every customer who abandons this service raises the average cost-per-line to serve the remaining customers. With an outdated product, falling revenues, and rising costs, the POTS business is unsustainable for the long run. Yet a web of federal and state regulations has the cumulative effect of prolonging, unnecessarily, the life of POTS and the PSTN."

    AT&T's arguments appear to have been intentionally designed to mirror those made by broadcasters during the early debate over the high-definition transition. While at the same time maintaining that only private investment in private services could make high-quality HDTV service possible for Americans, broadcasters looked to both Congress and the FCC to set the hard deadline that would serve as the ultimate incentive for affiliate stations to make their investments in the high-def transition.

    After a few delays, that transition ended up successful and without serious incident. Now, AT&T points to the need for a similar transition plan for wireline phone, calling POTS and PSTN "relics of a by-gone era."

    "The business model that sustained circuit-switched voice service over the last century is dying. For decades, POTS was the primary if not the exclusive option for voice communications, and nearly all households subscribed," reads AT&T's filing. "But in recent years technological change and market forces have made POTS and the PSTN increasingly obsolete. Those same forces make a full transition to broadband inevitable."

    The big problem: Although two-thirds of Americans now subscribe to some kind of broadband plan, service remains unavailable to as much as 10% of the country, according to research AT&T cited. Among those households, way too many have chosen not to subscribe -- a problem only a forced transition would solve.

T
34.92+0.23(+0.67%)11:45 AMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.