3 ms·
I read this article with a concern about an app I've worked on, where we intended to go thru an add accessibility support in after the first release, but it (an
by nirvana 15y ago
I read this article with a concern about an app I've worked on, where we intended to go thru an add accessibility support in after the first release, but it (and a bunch of other improvements) got dropped when priorities changed. I was reading to see if I could judge how our app (which should be mostly accessible) might have worked for this person... but they never mentioned what their disability was in their sample letter, and so I had no clue, and couldn't hazard a guess. (Except maybe that they are blind? Though I don't have enough clues to be at all confident in that guess.)
I wonder if part of the non-response they got was because they never explained what their disability was in their letters. I understand it really isn't some pizza restaurant's business to need to know it, but if they left that off, then it is hard for someone to understand their dificulty-- they might even read the email too fast and not even realize there is a disability at all. Thus it just sounds like someone who can't describe why the real problem is, and is instead giving web development advice to a customer service rep who, more likely than not, has no ability to even parse the email into actionable or useful information for the developers simply because the context is dropped by missing this key bit of information. (Even though the advice is useful to someone who is a web developer, even without knowing the disability, the CSR may not realize that.)
That said, I have gone thru a recent terrible experience attempting to deal with a company who is bringing in $150million a month in revenue, and can't be bothered to have CSRs actually read letters. Over the course of a dozen back and for the responses, each form letter I got from them, was written by a different person, and seemingly responded to a random word or two from my previous message, where they clearly didn't' read the whole ticket or even take a few minutes to actually comprehend what I was saying.
There's some really bad customer service out there, even from companies that at least don't have lack of budget as an excuse.
- Mz 15y agobut they never mentioned what their disability was From the article: ...making it inaccessible to blind and low vision users.
- jsavimbi 15y ago> but it (and a bunch of other improvements) got dropped when priorities changed More CTO's with disabilities need to be hired.
- protomyth 15y agoOr go ask the CTO to talk to the lawyers about what happened to Target. That talk will help avoid a very uncomfortable talk later on with the CEO and HR.
- jsavimbi 15y agoFrom my experience working in technology startups, I can say without a doubt that the CEO is focused on getting a product, any product in any state of progress, out the door and that HR thing you speak of is an office held by the beneficiary of nepotism and maintained with loyalty who's sole job is to complete the tasks assigned to them by the CEO, usually in a haphazardly incompetent manner. For example, I once worked at a firm where the HR person was my direct boss' sister-in-law and was living with one of the [shithead] project managers I had to deal with, who's sister-in-law was the receptionist/marketing genius. Do you think any of those four people had any grease to make demands on whether or not a product should include, or even be based upon conventions that would assist those with disabilities if said inclusion were to set back the shipping timetable? I think not. tl;dr: CEO's focus on sales and revenue, HR is a rubber stamp/sick day tracker, which can be outsourced.
- protomyth 15y agoI guess my point was the CEO will be concerned by the multi-million $ lawsuit and HR will be going over the CTO's severance package.
- jsavimbi 15y agoI know what you point was, and it's clear to many that in a common sense society that would be the case as you've correctly described it, however, my experience has always been one of sales first, people last. Regardless of the company's maturity.