Monday, June 8, 2009

Embracing the Single Payer System for Health Care

Thomas Hinton
Speaker & Author

There was a time when the United States of America provided the finest health care in the world. Today, the United States is a good example of how not to build a health care system for patients.
What happened? While the answer is simple, the solution to fixing our health care system is complex because of politics, profits, and protecting special interests. The solution requires political courage and leadership. It also requires a grass roots movement on the part of millions of Americans who believe the health care system must change and health care should become a right for all Americans and not a privilege for the few who can afford high health insurance premiums.
Consider these facts. There are 305 million Americans. Some 46 million Americans are uninsured. That’s just over 15% of our population. Nationwide, 202 million Americans are covered by private insurance programs. The average annual premium for a family policy on the open market is nearly $5,800. But, with premiums rising, and private insurance programs being more selective in who they will cover and how much they will pay for certain medical procedures, there is serious concern that premiums will increase while the number of insured Americans will drop significantly because they can no longer afford basic health insurance.
There is a solution that would produce better quality, more research, healthier patients, and entice more health care professionals to return to their chosen profession. It is the Single Payer System.
Regrettably, the Single Payer System solution isn’t even on the table as the president and Congress grapple with how to fix America’s broken health care system. While President Obama should be commended for bringing together key health care industry leaders representing the various factions to create a solution to the current health care mess, the patient -- the American people -- is dying of neglect!
As long as the entrenched health care insurance companies control the Congress and the White House through their lobbyists and campaign contributions, meaningful reform will never happen. Our system has been corrupted at the highest levels of government by profits and greed when action is required, and now!
It is time the political leadership in Washington showed real courage by standing up to the health insurance industry and its lobbyists and changed the way health care is purchased and delivered in the United States. Specifically, President Obama, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid must step forward and endorse the Single Payer System. This would eliminate the need for health care insurance companies and streamline the current system saving an estimated $400 Billion annually -- more than enough to cover those 46 million uninsured Americans who are at risk.
While the naysayers will argue that such a system will ruin health care and compromise the delivery of outstanding care, they are flat wrong. In fact, if we do not move quickly and boldly to correct our broken health care insurance system, more Americans will suffer, die, and face serious financial hardships because they will be shut out from obtaining insurance and, therefore, receiving proper health care.
In the words of Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), who chairs the powerful Senate Finance Committee which oversees health care reform, “Our health care system is in trouble: costs are rising at an unsustainable rate, too many Americans are uninsured, and quality of care isn’t up to par. High costs are making it increasingly difficult for Montana’s families and businesses to afford comprehensive health insurance, which means that Montana’s rate of uninsured is growing rapidly. Although the United States spends twice as much on health care as any other country, we clearly don’t have twice as much health care.
Ironically, it is Senator Max Baucus, the one elected official who could jump-start serious health care reform, who is blocking Single Payer legislation like HR 676. Why? Because, Senator Baucus is one of those Washington politicians who is beholden to the health care insurance industry! Senator Baucus is the third-largest recipient of contributions from the health care and pharmaceutical industries since 2005. Senator Baucus has received $413,000 in donations from health care and pharmaceutical companies and lobbyists. This is according to a March 8 article by Dan Eggen in the Washington Post (''Health Sector Has Donated Millions to Lawmakers''). While this money might be significant to the senator’s campaign fund, it is surprising that -- in the scheme of things and the greater good that could be done by the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee-- such a small amount of money could skew Senator Baucus’ judgment, shade his thinking, and compromise his leadership at a time when Americans desperately need his direction to change the status quo in health care.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why, at the recent Senate Finance Committee hearings on Health Care Reform, chaired by Senator Baucus, he refused to invite anyone who supported the Single-Payer System to appear as an expert witness. Senator Baucus did ensure several slots for his cronies from the health insurance industry as well as association leaders and others who endorsed President Obama’s simplistic health care ideas.
Also disturbing was the fact that Senator Baucus had several Single Payer advocates, who tried to speak out at his hearings, escorted from the Senate hearing room and arrested. This raises serious questions about Senator Baucus’ objectivity, balance and sincerity when it comes to championing health care reform. It’s clear that the United States needs a new health care champion who is objective and untainted by health insurance contributions. Is there such a politician who has the courage and will to stand up against the greedy insurance companies? We’ll see.
The number of uninsured Americans is growing at an alarming rate of nearly 14,000 people every day due to the economic recession and mounting job losses. This is unacceptable. But, what is also unacceptable is the band-aid approach by the president and Congress to keep our greed-driven health insurance system in place while more Americans suffer and die as a result of the policies, rules and procedures dictated by health insurers who only carry about profits, not patients! It is time for a change in how Americans pay for and receive health care.
Let’s define what a Single Payer System is and is not. In a single-payer health system, everyone has health insurance. It is either obtained through a private insurance company like Kaiser or Blue Cross/Blue Shield, or through a government funded program such as Medicare. Also, every person is free to choose their own doctors, hospitals and related health care services. When patients receives care or treatment, they sign a statement that verifies the services they received from their health care provider (doctor, nurse, hospital, etc.). The health care provider then sends a bill for services rendered to the Single Payer -- that is, a national health care administration created by Congress to pay the health provider for your treatment. It’s simple and straightforward.
The Single Payer System does not limit or dictate the type of treatment you can receive. Those decisions are made by you and your doctor. The Single Payer System will not dictate who can treat you. It only affects how your health care provider is paid. And, yes, it eliminates the need for all the health insurance companies currently in business which cost taxpayers about $400 billion annually.
According to the Institute of Medicine, 18,000 people in the United States die every year because they lack health insurance. That’s two people every hour. The United States also has a higher infant mortality level (more children under 1 year of age die) than many other democratic countries.
For many decades, several medical associations claimed that “health care is a privilege not a right.” In an era of human development, certainly the wealthiest nation in the world should make health care a right. The Single Payer System is a step in the right direction to establishing that right.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Who Needs Banks When You Have Credit Unions

by Tom Hinton

There's a great deal of consumer unrest sweeping across the United States. Many consumers are frustrated with their banks because we can't get loans, the interest rates on our credit cards are excessive, and banks are charging excessive fees on everything from checking to ATM transactions in order to squeeze a few extra dollars out of their preferred customers.

But wait! There is another option that your bank will never tell you about because they don't want to lose your business despite nickel and diming you! The option? Join your local credit union!

I realize changing your banking relationship is almost as much fun as having your wisdom teeth extracted. But, nowadays, joining your local credit union is simple and credit unions are eager to enroll new members. Also, they have money to lend at very reasonable terms. And, as far as credit cards are concerned, why pay 18-24% on your Visa or Mastercard when you can get the same credit card and benefits through your local credit union at low interest rates ranging from 4-9%. This is not rocket science, folks!

How can credit unions charge such modest rates? Consider the fact that credit unions are non-profit, member-owned organizations. They exist to serve their members. While they need to show a reasonable return-on-investment, they are not greedy like so many banks that must answer to shareholders. And, they are fully insured by the federal government up to $250,000 per account -- just like the banks. Gee, you can get the same protection for your money and pay lower rates... it makes sense to me!

So, stop your whining and go online and join your local credit union. To make it easy for you, there's a list of outstanding credit unions from California to New Jersey that are sponsoring members of the American Consumer Council. You can join them at no cost through the American Consumer Council by visiting ACC's website at: http://www.americanconsumercouncil.org/affiliates.html

Let me know how it goes!

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Customer Service Champs or Chumps

by Tom Hinton

In the March 2, 2009 issue of Business Week, the magazine’s cover story was entitled Extreme Customer Service. Business Week touted a list of 25 companies they referred to as “Customer Service Champs.” I’m wondering if there was a typo. Perhaps, it should have read “chumps.”

Frankly, these types of annual customer satisfaction lists amount to little more than beauty contests. In this case it appears that Business Week wiggled and waggled the criteria in so many different ways, the Wicked Witch of the North might have come out a winner! Consider how Business Week arrived at its results. First, Business Week tinkered with the credible criteria of its sister-company, J.D Power & Associates. Next, Business Week padded the scoring with bonus points for industry leaders while punishing companies like Starbucks, which scored high among readers, but was penalized because none of its peers-competitors scored well (duh!). Finally, Business Week included the randomly subjective views of 1,000 of its own BusinessWeek Market Advisory Board. Seriously, folks, this is how Business Week gets us to their Top 25 Customer Service champs. Hmmm? It causes me to wonder if this exercise is about crowning customer service champs or selling more issues of their popular weekly magazine?

As I examine the rankings of the top 25 companies, I note that nearly half, 11 in all, of the 25 companies cited for customer service excellence received a grade of B+, B, or B- on one or both of the major criteria -- Quality of Staff and Efficiency of Service. This begs the question: How can a company that scores less than an “A” be crowned as a customer service champ?

Another consideration for the scoring was a company’s industry ranking. What does that have to do with customer service excellence? A company either gets it right with its customers -- like a Starbucks -- or it doesn’t. Incidentally, I only mention Starbucks because by Business Week’s own admission, Starbucks might have deserved to be on their top 25 list, but was not included because its industry peers scored poorly. So what? If that principle was followed across all industry sectors I seriously doubt a single automaker would be listed. But, somehow Business Week came up with four credible selections from the auto industry to grace their top 25 list of customer service champs. How interesting.

Another question I have regarding Business Week’s criteria is how does a customer judge the Quality of Staff? It’s superficial criteria because rarely do customers get close enough to an organization to competently judge its quality of staff. Just because Joe Hustler or Susie Saleswoman smiles and remembers my name does not mean they have superior product knowledge or customer service skills. Quality of Staff is tied to a company’s hiring and training process. It’s determined by a company’s culture and level of investment in people. Certainly, customer satisfaction is a byproduct of Quality of Staff, but to suggest a reader of Business Week would know the intricacies of how Amazon.com or Lexus develops its staff is nonsense.

And, what in the world does “Efficiency of Service” have to do with customer satisfaction? The answer is nothing. If Business Week had called it “Effectiveness of Service” I would be impressed. But “Efficiency of Service” is nonsense.

Let me offer an example that demonstrates the difference. This week I met a client for breakfast in a well-known chain restaurant. Miguel, the waiter, was friendly and efficient. When we asked for coffee or juice, he responded. When we requested a refill, he responded again. If I used Business Week’s criteria, the chain would score an A+ because Miguel was efficient. But, despite Miguel’s positive demeanor, the order was wrong. The bacon was not crispy and the scrambled eggs were dry. Yes, he served us quickly but that was not our criteria for customer satisfaction. We wanted him to get the order right! When a customer needs to flag down the wait staff to request more coffee or hot water that’s not deserving of an A or a B score. When the cashier failed to add the gratuity to our final check as requested causing us to wait until he could reprocess our credit card, that’s not deserving of an A or a B score. Efficient? Yes! Effective? No!

But, let’s set aside the flawed methodology of Business Week for a moment and examine their top 25 customer service champs. Maybe, by some stroke of luck, they got it right. Among the 12 companies that scored ratings of A+, A, or A- are: Amazon.com, USAA, Jaguar, Lexus, The Ritz-Carlton Hotels, Publix Super Markets, Zappos.com, Hewlett-Packard, Ace Hardware, Four Seasons Hotels & Resorts, Cadillac, BMW, and JW Marriott Hotels. At first glance this appears to be a solid list. But, what’s disturbing to me is that between #1 Amazon.com and #25 JW Marriott, there’s a spread of 170.14 points. What’s wrong with this picture?

The answer lies in the “B” squad results. You see, 11 companies -- T.Rowe Price, KeyBank, Nordstrom, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, American Express, Trader Joe’s, JetBlue Airways, Apple, Charles Schwab, True Value, and L.L. Bean -- all outranked JW Marriott (#25) despite the fact that their grades included a B+, B, or B-. Are you kidding me? So, you can see how a flawed criteria can skew the scoring results.

On that subject, I seriously wonder how three of these companies even made the list. Based on my personal experience and knowledge of their service performance I am amazed that Enterprise Rent-a-Car, American Express, and JetBlue Airways got past the first cut. For the past year, American Express has been canceling credit worthy card members to reduce its exposure in tough economic times. That’s understandable, but it's not good customer service. And, my experience with Enterprise Rent-a-Car has been disastrous. In three rentals, Enterprise never got it right. Of course, their rental car competition leaves much to be desired as well. And, fair or unfair, JetBlue Airways cannot possibly be considered a serious contender for customer service champ as long as the image of passengers left stranded on JetBlue airplanes for up to 11 hours during an ice storm at JFK on Valentine’s Day 2007 remains fresh in our minds. Sorry JetBlue, but that’s a deal-breaker in my book. For what it’s worth, Business Week scored JetBlue Airways above Apple, Charles Schwab, and BWM among others. Go figure?

Of the remaining 8 companies on the “B” Squad, I seriously question how top performers such as Charles Schwab, which rates a perfect score based on my personal experience, and Apple, which continues to run circles around its competitors as the leader in consumer electronics innovation, rank below the pathetic “Double B” score of Enterprise Rent-A-Car? Business Week can’t be serious!

Perhaps it can be argued using valid data that companies like Nordstrom, the once-legendary customer service role model, and True Value, the hardware store that only scored a pair of B+s, should have scored higher in the Business Week customer service poll. But, these are tough times and some companies have cut staff and training to save money. If that’s the case, they don’t belong on the top 25 list.

KeyBank of Cleveland and T. Rowe Price, the brokerage firm, get a pass. I cannot dispute their service performance since I have no personal experience with either company, nor have I studied their customer service ratings.

I do find it interesting that four automakers -- namely, Jaguar (#3), Lexus (#4), Cadillac (#14), and BMW (#22) -- all scored A+ ratings with Business Week despite the fact that most consumers rank the auto-buying experience just below a visit to the dentist. Perhaps, Jaguar has done some remarkable things in the past 12 months to earn its position as the customer service champ of automakers. But I doubt it. Jaguar would have to be wizards to push ahead of Lexus and BMW on their customer service scores.

So, there you have it, folks. The top 25 customer service champs. With all due respect to Business Week, the numbers just don’t add up. Having said that, I do consider Business Week to be among the top 25 business publications in America!

About the Author. Tom Hinton is America's Expert on Business Excellence. Tom is a popular speaker on Leadership, Change, and Sustainability. He is the author of four books including his soon-to-be-released book entitled, 10,000 Days: The Secret to Finding Purpose, Peace and Passion for the Rest of Your Life. For more information please visit: www.tomhinton.com

Friday, November 21, 2008

Getting Detroit Back on the Road to Recovery

For twenty-five years General Motors, Ford and Chrysler have resisted common sense. Now, their leaders have flown into Washington, D.C. on their corporate jets begging Congress to give them billions in another federal bailout scheme. They just don’t get it. These auto giants are grossly mismanaged and misdirected from the top down. Their woes are self-inflicted. Under their current management apparatus the Big Three are unworthy of any federal bailout. Let them take the first step on the road to recovery by filing for bankruptcy.

Certainly, consumers don’t want these companies to go out of business. But, to provide them with billions of dollars from the federal government will only exacerbate the current problem. What Detroit needs is a leadership lobotomy -- from the head down.

For starters, the Big Three can eliminate many of the perks that are symbolic of management’s arrogance. I’m talking about the corporate jets, the executive dining rooms, and the huge bonuses senior management has received for over-promising and under-delivering to shareholders.

Secondly, the United Auto Workers needs to wise-up. As Lee Iacocca once remarked in the 1980s, “We have jobs at $40 an hour, but we don’t have any jobs at $75 an hour [adjusted for inflation].” The UAW needs to approve new labor agreements that bring workers’ costs in line with Honda, Nissan and Toyota which are capturing increased market share because their unit costs are considerably lower than the Big Three.

Retiree benefits must also be reduced so that the Big Three’s pension costs are in line with their foreign competitors. Workers deserve a reasonable wage, but under the current labor agreements, the Big Three cannot compete. Unless the UAW agrees to dramatic wage cuts its members will find themselves unemployed and Detroit will suffer.

Next, the boards of General Motors and Chrysler must bring in new management teams. The ideal leadership will come from outside the auto industry. They need to break the mold as Ford Motor Company did by hiring Alan Mulally from The Boeing Company. While Mulally is struggling, he is making progress and instituting long-overdue changes at Ford. Fresh thinking and innovation should rule the day at the Big Three. Quality must be rediscovered and incentives for eliminating defects should be instituted to inspire workers to build quality cars and trucks the first time!

The Big Three’s biggest challenge is to project into the future and understand what consumers want and need. That’s pretty simple according to most consumer surveys and the recent spike in gasoline prices. Consumers want options. Consumers want fuel efficiency -- and I’m talking about 50 miles per gallon not a measly 21 mpg. And, we want electric cars and other types of clean fuel-burning motors that don’t pollute the environment. These types of innovations will invigorate the huge supply chain that feeds off Detroit. Certainly, the thousands of suppliers deserve a chance to demonstrate their talents in terms of going Green and helping a revitalized Big Three enter a new era of auto-making. But, they will remain stuck in neutral as long as Detroit continues to think backwards.

Finally, shareholders and bondholders need to pony-up. They gambled on the Big Three and, frankly, they lost. Let’s not burden American taxpayers without first putting the onus on those investors who clearly understand the odds associated with any stock purchase. It might be smart to remind them of the old adage, “Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.”

Ironically, despite their serious financial problems, General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have an abundance of talented people throughout their ranks. These people have great ideas that should be solicited and implemented. Often times, it’s the workers who know best how to fix management’s mess. It’s time Detroit got some inspired leadership that abandons the re-treaded ideas of the past that have gone flat. What the Big Three desperately need is a plan for success instead of trying to further bleed American consumers and taxpayers with another ill-conceived bailout.

About the Author:
Thomas Hinton is president of the American Consumer Council. He can be reached at tom@americanconsumercouncil.org

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Drinking the Poisoned Cool-Aid of American Politics


by Tom Hinton

My father used to remind his children to avoid conversations on politics and religion. “Stick to the weather,” he admonished us. “You’re not going to change somebody’s political or religious beliefs in a ten minute conversation. You’ll only alienate them.” It's sound advice if only I could follow it.

But, in this season of presidential politics, emotions run hot. It’s hard to bite my lip and not express an opinion. Recently, I had a few unpleasant exchanges with my sister about the 2008 presidential election. She’s a staunch Republican and thinks American will collapse if John McCain and Sarah Palin are not victorious in November. I’m also a registered Republican who thinks the Bush-Cheney Administration has been an unmitigated disaster and already caused serious economic havoc around the world. I’m supporting Barack Obama in the hopes that the Democrats will get America back on the right track. After several heated exchanges, nothing had changed. She likes McCain and I want a new direction. We agreed to disagree. Dad was right.

But, the most disturbing aspect of these election conversations I’ve had with those who espouse the far-Right Republican position is their extreme views and outrageous allegations about Senator Obama and the Democrats. For example, my sister is an educated, middle-class woman who truly believes that our current economic demise has been caused by a conspiracy. The conspirators are ACORN, a non-profit organization that advocates voter rights and voting registration, and Senator Barack Obama. She also believes that, if elected, Obama will undermine America’s national security by siding with the terrorists given his Arab background and pro-Muslim (and, therefore, anti-Christian) beliefs. I was dumbfounded to hear my sister espouse these views. How could she believe such drivel?

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Obama is a Christian and his ethnic roots are in Kenya and Kansas. Obama is the son of a white Kansas woman and a black African who came to the United States from Kenya, Africa. Like John McCain and Joe Biden, Obama is a United States Senator. Obama is also a Harvard graduate, a veteran of Chicago politics, long-time Illinois resident, married to a talented lawyer, and they have two young daughters. You don’t get much more American than that!

So, where do people like my sister come up with these warped beliefs that are based on such outrageous innuendos, outright lies, and destructive rumors? I asked her where she got her information and she told me that she listened religiously to Fox News as well as two radio shows hosted by Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage. Since I wasn't really tuned in to these media programs, I decided that for two weeks I would conduct a personal experiment to find out if these media sources were poisoning the well from which conservative American voters like my sister get their information.

Regrettably, I discovered that Fox News and the radio personalities she listens to are not only fueling the fires of hatred and divisiveness among Americans with their vitriolic, biased rantings, but they are the spring source from which many of the lies, fabrications, innuendos, and misstatements about Senator Obama originate. During my two week listening experiment, I made note of the various comments and statements that sounded dubious or false made by the Fox News anchors and reporters as well as Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Savage. I did not keep track of the exaggerated opinions of the many pundits and guests who appeared on these various programs. In a two-week timespan, I counted more than 362 comments that were either blatantly false or grossly misleading including repeated claims that Obama was a Muslim, Arab, or he supported terrorists. This included two terrorist-related remarks during interviews with the Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and two anti-American remarks about Obama from a Republican congresswoman who represented St. Cloud, Minnesota. In none of those cases did the reporter conducting the interview try to correct these candidates' gross misstatements.

I was so disgusted with the slanted reporting that these media outlets practiced that it moved me to write this article and raise the question, Why? Why do people who call themselves journalists and are entrusted with reporting the news or advocate a certain political philosophy resort to lies, fabrications, innuendos, and misstatements to make their case? Is it not enough to merely say to their viewers that they disagree with Obama and the Democrats and build their argument on the facts? Why must they spew such toxic and hateful messages? This is wrong and a gross disservice to the ethics and values upon which America was founded. Americans should stand-up and say “enough!” Perhaps, they will as they vote on Election Day.

When those who are entrusted with reporting the news and offering their views on presidential politics and national elections resort to poisoning the well from which voters must drink to quench their thirst for information and facts in order to make an educated decision to elect the next president of the United States, a terrible disservice is done. Certainly, everybody is entitled to their opinion and even a fool has the right to espouse their beliefs in America. But, when professional commentators, reporters, and radio personalities spew a message of divisiveness and hatred by knowingly fanning the political flames with their lies and misrepresentations, they have lost their right to be called professionals let alone journalists. They have reduced themselves to overpaid entertainers and jokers, and poor ones at that!

I subscribe to the belief that in American politics both parties embrace a core philosophy and their standard-bearers typically reflect the views of their party. I also think it’s important from time to time to shake-up the Congress and White House just to keep everyone in-line. I have never been one to simply vote the party slate. Blind allegiance is unhealthy. I think political balance is good. Democrats and Republicans as well as other political parties offer American voters an important choice, and choice is essential to preserving any democracy.

Finally, while conducting my fair-and-balanced media experiment over the past two weeks, I decided to re-read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America. Since manyreporters and pundits were critical of Governor Sarah Palin’s inept response to an elementary question regarding the job of the vice president, I decided to review these two documents. These are amazing works by our Founding Fathers. Anyone who wants clarity about the vision, values, and mechanics of America's experiment with democracy should read these masterpieces. I also encourage you to read them to your teen-agers so they understand why the United States of America was established and what we truly stand for. I think too many Americans, especially in the fringe media, have forgotten these principles and could benefit from a refresher course.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

My Summer Vacation

By Bill Kalmar

For some, Labor Day signals the end of summer as preparations for autumn and the accompanying holidays begin. As is customary in some locales, warm weather clothes, including one’s white wardrobe and shoes, are returned to the closet until next spring. Children and students go back to school, much to the delight of their parents, and hopefully to the excitement of their teachers.

Chances are one of the kids’ first assignments will be to draft a report on the activities of their summer vacation. Not to be left out of this assignment, I thought it appropriate that I pen a few lines about one of our recent trips. There were no death-defying rides on some monster roller coaster, no surfing in shark-infested waters or aerial descents with a parachute from a plane, just a sensible trip to Chicago for my wife and me.

What made the trip so memorable was something I wrote about in my August column for QualityInsider (Online at www .qualitydigest.com/content/quality-insider.) The column recounted several encounters with poor service, and thus I concluded that I was in fact a magnet for service personnel and organizations that don’t practice performance excellence. Well, traveling to Chicago convinced me that somehow I had been demagnetized, at least on this one occasion.

Off to a good start

Our trip began early on a weekday as we departed our home in Lake Orion, Michigan. Our first stop was The Big Apple Bagel. As we opened the door, the aroma of fresh bagels and coffee wafted into our nostrils. Three upbeat and smiling clerks greeted us with a hearty good morning--and this was 7 a.m. It’s no wonder that this particular location is well frequented by regulars and transients alike. We left, bagels and coffee in hand, knowing that our trip was off to a great start.

Motoring to Chicago took us on the Indiana Toll Road. Often, those manning the toll booths are cranky and don’t engage in many pleasantries. Perhaps the toll road commission had everyone read Jim Collins’ book Good to Great ( Harper Collins, 2001 ) because we were met with friendly greetings at each booth. Somehow that lessened the strain of doling out a couple of bucks every 50 miles or so.

We arrived at our hotel, blocks away from the Magnificent Mile, just after noon. Our room wasn’t ready, so to take the sting off our having to wander the streets of the Windy City in our traveling clothes, the hotel gave us a room upgrade.

After a five-hour trip, which included the last 30 minutes in typical Chicago traffic, we were ready for lunch. One of our favorite haunts in the Toddling Town is Gibson’s Steak House on Rush Street. Sitting on the enclosed street-level porch gives one a view of the horse-drawn carriages trekking through town and the hundreds of shoppers toting their bags laden with one-of-a-kind purchases that can only be found in Chicago. It seems that no one in the town realizes that there is a recession underway. The streets were crowded, and restaurants and hotels were at capacity.

Our lunch was an epicurean delight even though my medium-rare steak was a bit overcooked. Our waitress, Deena, noticed the lack of rare red beef on my plate and suggested that she would have another one prepared. I politely declined and stated that it was still just fine. When our bill arrived, Deena had unexpectedly taken the cost of my steak off the bill. She did this without my having to raise an eyebrow or growl about the preparation. This signaled to me that I was in the process of being demagnetized.

After lunch we wandered into the Neiman Marcus store. Prior to our trip, we had received a phone call from a Neiman Marcus employee, Naomi, indicating that some items I might be interested in were on sale, but that after the first of the month the prices would be increasing. As we walked into Naomi’s sales area, she greeted us by name and was genuinely excited to see us again. Our last visit had been the previous year, but her ability to remember names and faces is uncanny. While in the store, I noticed that Naomi maintained a huge three-ring binder of the names and phone numbers and past purchases of all her customers. Her practice of contacting customers personally when sales develop is no doubt one of the reasons why Neiman Marcus regularly posts sales increases and profits while other stores are incurring losses.

Those of you who are watch aficionados like me would certainly enjoy window-shopping at the Tourneau store in the Water Tower. Being greeted by name by Michael, the salesperson who sold me a watch three years ago, is something that still makes an impression on me. Like Naomi at Neiman Marcus, Michael remembers names and even the type of watch I purchased. Maybe he anticipates me buying another one shortly?

Quality experiences continue

The next day saw us walking over to another of our favorite restaurants--Tucci Benucch. It’s a small Italian restaurant in the Bloomingdale’s building. For us, a trip to Chicago isn’t complete without enjoying the great salads at this little nook on the sixth floor. To our surprise and disappointment, the restaurant had now morphed into “Frankie’s Pizza,” although we were told that it was under the same management. We dined, but it was difficult to hide my disillusionment at losing our favorite lunch haunt. Our waitress must have picked up on my vibes because when we returned home there was a message on our voice mail from the restaurant’s manager indicating that many of the same menu items from Tucci Benucch could still be ordered if we asked. Just another indication to me how embedded customer service is in Chicago.

Even the cabbies get it!

Cab drivers were equally pleasant and customer-focused even though it took us several days to catch our breath from the Indy 500-inspired drivers who dart around the downtown area as if they were vying for the pole position for the next race.

As you can see, our voyage to the Windy City was an example in performance excellence. And it didn’t end there. When we returned home, I received an e-mail from The Wall Street Journal, which is indicative of its strong focus on customer service. Here is an excerpt: “We see that delivery of your Wall Street Journal was scheduled to resume today after a temporary suspension and are following up to check that it did.” Wow! Is that great service or what?

In other news

I hope that you’ll permit me to opine on some other topics.

I recently purchased a polo shirt from Macy’s and attempted to have Lord & Taylor match the price. I wrote Lord & Taylor about the incident, and their reply indicated that I would hear from “the appropriate department and someone will be in touch with you within five to seven business days.”

After a wait of three weeks, I contacted the store again. A reply finally arrived indicating that “Lord & Taylor does not have a practice of matching prices.” Perhaps the delay was attributed to the management formulating a policy? Who knows, but it tells me a lot about how it resolves customer service questions.

More and more defective products continue to enter our country from China. We are now told to check our tire pressure in the wake of a recall of as many as 30 million replacement rubber valve stems. These defective parts can crack prematurely and cause tires to lose air. At highway speeds, this loss of air could result in a loss of control with a resultant crash. It’s time we boycott Chinese products until such time as that country raises its level of quality. At this juncture, what with all the lead-based products that we have banned, I think a total ban on products from China isn’t out of the question. What do you think?

If you have noticed a downturn in customer service in some segments, let me offer an explanation. Here in Michigan, there are thousands of automotive professionals who have been outsourced, downsized, or as we say--fired! These highly qualified people now find themselves working in positions much below their level of expertise, and as such, their attitude and demeanor in dealing with customers isn’t what you would characterize as exemplary. As we frequent the various restaurants and stores in our area, I often question how long the person has been employed. What I’m finding is that there are many college grads and MBAs who are now flipping burgers. This no doubt does not make for a pleasant experience for them or the customers.

Speaking of restaurants, the Ruby Tuesday chain is looking at changing its theme by eliminating the 1980s-style décor of black-and-white checked tablecloths and Tiffany-style lamps with brass rails. There will be a new menu and a more contemporary look. Let’s hope that the consultants who are working on this project aren’t the same ones who worked on Bill Knapp’s restaurant chain. In my opinion, changing the theme and focus of this chain ultimately put them out of business. How I miss those chocolate cakes!

What would one of my articles be without a plug for my favorite hotel--The Ritz-Carlton. The J.D. Power & Associates 2008 North America Hotel Guest Satisfaction Index Study finds that the Ritz-Carlton won again as the top-scoring chain in the luxury category. Others that led in the survey included Embassy Suites in the upscale category, Hyatt Place for mid-scale full service, Drury Inn & Suites for mid-scale limited service, and for the seventh consecutive year, Microtel Inns & Suites took top honors in the economy/budget category.

Back to the hammock

Well, as I’m writing this article, the dog days of summer are coming to an end and cool nights are upon us once more. Hanging out in the hammock is still my top choice for a restful afternoon, and I hope all of you have that special place where you can relax and maybe, if I’m not being too presumptuous, ponder these words. If something resonated with you or some of my rants irritated you, please let me know by writing to the e-mail address at the bottom of this page. I personally respond to every e-mail. Until next time, remember the quote from Jonathan Swift: “You cannot reason a man out of something that he did not reason his way into.”

And by the way, as a result of our trip to Chicago, where we experienced wonderful service, I no longer attract metal shavings to my body. I have been poor-service demagnetized--at least for the moment.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Wall Street Cries 'Wolf" Over Credit Crunch

by Tom Hinton


As President Bush addressed the American public last night on America’s latest crisis -- our nation’s economic credit crunch -- I couldn’t help but recall what Marcellus said in William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet. “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.” Certainly something is terribly rotten in the United States when a crisis of this magnitude mushrooms overnight and requires a $700 Billion solution. What in the world is going on with our national leaders?

Americans are being told by the president that our national economy -- the same economy that just last week was “fundamentally sound” according to Senator John McCain -- is facing a near-Depression disaster due to a meltdown of the credit markets which resulted in the failure of three major Wall Street banks that controlled hundreds of billions of dollars in devalued mortgages and other questionable loan derivates. The Bush Administration’s solution is simple. Congress should hand over $700 Billion to Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson, a thirty-year veteran of Goldman Sachs, one of the two remaining giant Wall Street firms that are teetering on the brink of collapse due to poor investment decisions,

There’s no denying we have a serious problem. But, the question that must be resolved by Congress before it hands over $700 Billion to Secretary Paulson to dole out as he sees fit is this: Is this Wall Street’s problem or is it Main Street’s problem? If the answer is Main Street, we have a serious crisis and Congress needs to take immediate action. However, if the answer is Wall Street, perhaps Congress needs to take a deep breath and try to understand the ramifications of the problem before endorsing the Bush Administration’s two-page, $700 Billion bailout solution.

American Consumers are very skeptical of the Bush Administration’s solution for ailing Wall Street financial companies. So far, consumers don’t like what they’re hearing. According to a Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll, Americans say Congress should reject the Bush Plan. By a margin of 55 percent to 31 percent, Americans say it's not the government's responsibility to bail out banking companies with taxpayer dollars, even if their collapse could damage the economy. Furthermore, Americans are now blaming Wall Street and President George W. Bush for the credit crisis.

The debate is running so hot that political analysts are suggesting that any member of Congress who supports the Bush Bailout is in jeopardy of losing their seat in the November 4th election. This is causing both Democrats and Republicans to take pause and reconsider their options -- and they should! The right solution has not yet been found.

If the problem is a potential failure of major Wall Street banks, which are holding hundreds of billions of dollars in depreciating loans such as mortgages, a different solution will be required so that consumers can still access money for various loans such as auto loans, mortgage loans, college tuition loans, and so forth. Small businesses will also need money in the form of loans to purchase inventory, make payroll, and capitalize their businesses. These are important issues that the Bush Administration and Congress must evaluate. To allow a credit freeze to occur among the major banks could have serious negative consequences for Main Street.

But, having said that, the bigger issue is what will happen to Main Street if Congress does not act and the remaining Wall Street banks fail or face a fire sale? This is the dominant issue that concerns consumers because most of their money is deposited in local banks and credit unions not in Goldman Sachs and other vulnerable Wall Street financial institutions. It’s the Main Street banks and credit unions that control the 90-day revolving loans of their small business clients. It’s the Main Street banks and credit unions that will reject new loans and demand higher cash deposits if credit is tight. But, this is not yet happening. In fact, some of the large banks are eager to make loans at below-market rates. So, given the doom-and-gloom messages coming from the Bush Administration, someone in Congress needs to call a time-out and ask for a replay. What is really happening here?

Is this a case of Wall Street and the Bush Administration crying “wolf” in an effort to bailout their long-time supporters and cronies? Or, is this a serious financial crisis that could paralyze the global economy? Many consumers don’t care what happens to the Wall Street firms. Perhaps, this is being narrow-minded on their part, but consumers are more concerned about keeping their jobs, paying their bills, and avoiding foreclosure.

Certainly, the one area that must be addressed immediately by Congress is the troubling number of home foreclosures. I believe this is the number one problem in the American economy because so many industries are linked to home ownership. According to government figures, there are nearly 10,000 home foreclosures taking place every day. This is a very serious problem that Congress must fix in the next thirty days because home ownership is the bedrock of America’s middle class. It is also the primary source for most local and state taxes. To allow millions of homeowners to be foreclosed on due to rigged sub-prime loans and a series of complex financial equations that baffle most economists is unfair and will undermine the American economy faster than any other single economic problem.

I recommend three steps to help solve our current economic crisis. First, Congress needs to immediately freeze all home foreclosure actions for one year and create a new agency, The Homeowners Resolution Trust Corporation (HRTC), which would purchase all troubled mortgages and renegotiate those loans with homeowners through local lenders and banks. By creating a one-year moratorium on foreclosures, the federal government can buy time to sort through all the troubled home loans, arrange for refinancing on those mortgages that can be salvaged, and retain the deeds of trust as a means to protect taxpayers from getting fleeced. This would give threatened homeowners some breathing room to resolve their financial problems. It would also allow local and state governments to recoup back taxes that homeowners have failed to pay. Finally, it would pump money into hundreds of local economies through local banks and credit unions that agreed to sell their troubled mortgages back to the HRTC and close their books on those mortgage loans. This step would give local banks more lending capital to revitalize local communities and small businesses. The HRTC would create federal standards and guidelines to ensure only valid mortgages are re-purchased by the HRTC from certified banks, credit unions, and other lenders.

Secondly, the federal government should tighten the requirements used by Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae for buying federally guaranteed mortgage loans. Just thirty years ago, prospective homebuyers had to meet very clear criteria before they could buy their dream home. We need to return to those days of fair and reasonable guidelines to ensure stability in the home purchasing process..

Thirdly, Congress should reinstitute stiff regulations and severe criminal penalties -- including prison time and hefty fines -- for those corporate officers and directors who violate SEC laws and try to fleece shareholders and taxpayers. The era of Anything Goes on Wall Street needs to end! Tough laws and enforcement by federal agencies can eliminate the shady dealers who are peddling under-valued derivatives and sub-prime loan schemes.

Those unscrupulous people who perpetrated this financial ponzi scheme on Wall Street would like us to believe that consumers, who purchased their homes on good faith and credit, are to blame for the current economic mess. But, Americans know better. The real culprits are the very people who are now crying ‘wolf’ and lobbying Congress -- and the American taxpayers -- to bail them out. You’ll see their ads in major newspapers and on the television networks. Beware of them. There are three culprits who got us into this pickle and now want us to bail them out. They include state and federal regulators who allowed banks to shift billions of dollars of questionable credit off their balance sheets and into the hands of unsophisticated foreign investors who were lied to. They also include hedge-fund managers and pension-fund managers who purchased sophisticated high-yield debt instruments they didn't understand and now cry mea culpa. Finally, we can blame the over-educated economists and bankers who fabricated mathematical equations and promoted their flawed lending models that enticed unsuspecting banks to purchase those high-yield debt instruments.

There’s no question that there is a hungry wolf out there. But, Congress should act cautiously as it attempts to sort through this economic mess. Certainly, we must avoid a credit meltdown. But, if Main Street can still function without burdening the American taxpayer with $700 Billion of Wall Street debt, perhaps logic and reasoning dictates we save Main Street and leave the bulls and the bears to the wolves.

About the Author. Thomas Hinton is president of the American Consumer Council, a non-profit consumer education organization with 85,000 members. He can be reached at: tom@americanconsumercouncil.org