First off, let me say that there is no way, no matter how charismatic, how dynamic a politician is, that he is not going to get a hearty, healthy heaping of What The Heck?! from this website. I don’t care if they’re Republican or Democrat, or any of the other minor food groups.

When is the public going to learn that all politicians are corrupt simply because the system itself is inherently corrupt? (Most systems of government are.) By its very nature a political system that provides too much monetary incentive exerts excessive temptation to wield power for personal gain.

And though many of you are shrieking, “Anarchist!” right about now, let me say for the record I am not an anarchist. I believe our basic system of government, as defined by the founding fathers, is the best around. It is the most stable, has the most checks and balances (at least in theory), and it provides a common “law of the land” for all people, transcending all other alliances, therefore uniting us under a system of values rather than of ethnicity, race, or religion. In fact, our values are our culture.

But, there are definite ways of making it better.

Sure, some politicians are corrupt to greater or lesser degrees. But if they all weren’t sullied by the greasy waters of the political pool (think of the slimy pond in front of the gates of Moria in LOTR), they would voluntarily do the following:

• Accept a salary that was less than the median income is in their state, or ideally no salary at all

• Reign in their expense account, or give it up in favor of provided services

• Limit terms so that the natural flow of ideas is not stagnated.

• Limit campaign contributions to $10 per person and none from businesses or better yet stop taking private money entirely

Is this really too much to ask?

Politicians should remember that being a representative is not a job—it’s public service. This is not a new idea, it goes straight back to the early days of our nation. Representatives only have to show up to vote, at least in the state of Pennsylvania. This is not and should not be considered a “career”.

If politicians make a median salary or better yet none at all, then there is no personal incentive other than the will to do good (we’d hope) for the people. A politician would then become someone with a vocation to make the world a better place, not some selfless creature, but one who knows that he will benefit personally from the overall betterment of the circumstances of each individual in society.

And don’t give me that “Socialist!” crap. I am all for individual rights, but a group of individuals constitutes a society, a group, no matter how you want to do the math.

Additionally, if politicians were unable to become entrenched career politicians, they would be more concerned with the business at hand and less concerned with figuring out how to get re-elected.

The costs associated with meals, transportation, and housing for politicians who must travel from their home bases are real, however why not put a cap on the amount they can spend per meal. Some ideas are:

• Allow the public to vote on how much their average meal at a middle class restaurant should cost

• Compensate the politician for travel time the same way most people are compensated: by making them submit mileage. They could also be granted some small amount for wear and tear on a vehicle. OR

• We can provide them with a middle class company vehicle like a low end Honda or Toyota, or if we have to stay domestic, a Ford Focus. They can drive themselves, just like anyone else would have to do. Better yet, let them take public transportation once in a while. I know there are several trains that go from Philly to Harrisburg regularly.

• For housing, we can take a look at universities for our cue, and I don’t mean the Ivy League ones. Let them live in dormitories, the standard being that of the best state schools. Surely this standard of lodging should be amenable to the average politician, given the luxurious allowance of a private bath for each room and maybe t.v. Of course, we would give them an internet connection for their laptops (laptops being their own purchase).

• Finally, the only way to remove special interests once and for all from politics is by limiting their ability to put politicians in their pockets. Why not have a basic campaign allowance, to be voted on by citizens, allotted for each politician. With those limitations, the challenge would be to come up with the most creative ways to get their message out there, without one having a greater advantage. They would have to start on equal footing. They also could not contribute their own finances to the campaign. This would allow access to the political arena for everyone, not just the rich and privileged.

By Shakur Pfist
Of Lehigh Valley What The Heck?!

By now you’ve probably heard both sides of the debate over charter schools vs. public schools. The name of the battle, however, is inaccurate, since charter schools are a type of public school, offering what is sometimes the only alternative to the broader and magnificently failing public school system available to the non-rich in the state of Pennsylvania.

The (possible) Lehigh College Prep Charter School is one such school that aims to let the cream finally rise to the top—or at least give it the opportunity to do so without it getting whipped first. With a curriculum aimed at math, science, and technology, the proposed school hopes to provide students from all over the Lehigh Valley and from all walks of life with a more targeted education, priming them for university degrees and careers on the cutting edge.

As the coalition for this charter school moves forward seeking approval from the Allentown School Board, and as the Pennsylvania State Senate considers changes to facilitate the creation such charter schools, arguments and comments from both sides are drawing attention.

The argument put forth by one, Arlene Scott, of Upper Saucon Township, is that charter schools use public resources to aid a select group—and that they increase social, cultural, and academic segregation and undermine the basic foundation of the public school (whatever that is). She even goes on to use that by now clichéd expression harkening back to the dark days of racial segregation in the U.S., “separate but equal”, stating that charter schools by their very nature create this kind of environment.

I should hope not. Charter schools exist to provide a community with an alternative to the substandard curriculum, weak educators, and often dangerous public school environment that many children have to face. They provide a focused and specific educational directive, require greater accountability not only from teachers but from parents, and allow individualized attention for students in need.  Right off the bat you can tell this is not “separate but equal”—it is far superior.

Ms. Scott bemoans the fact that charter schools “control student admission, dismiss the truant and behaviorally challenged, and have much more power to customize many aspects of curriculum and instruction.” And this is a bad thing how?

Should we reward class cutting, acting out, and poor academic progress on the part of students with exemplary opportunities which most likely they will not value, or worse yet should we not provide any of these great opportunities just for the sake of having everyone educated equally poorly? Should we grant ever more monstrous sums of money to inept public school system educators and indifferent, entrenched administrators? Should we not tailor school curriculum to the demands of today’s intellectual or artistic requirements for success, or for whatever ultimate goal a child may have?

And let us recall, and remember for all posterity, that this is a public school—anyone from any background can attend. We are no longer living in the day where, say, being a minority meant you were poor or from an uneducated family. In fact, I’m pretty sure it never meant that to begin with. The “separation” you speak of, Ms. Scott, is simply the serious student and parent from the disinterested student and parent.

You also seem to intimate, Ms. Scott, that charter schools are almost a form of ethnic or cultural cleansing instituted by a privileged few. And the tenor of your argument seems to indicate you mean either rich people or white people. I don’t know about you, but in the case of Lehigh College Prep Charter School some of the prospective founders’ names don’t exactly strike me as “Wasp-ish” (if you’re going that “only white people=rich and privileged” route, which is ridiculous) or even from any one particular race or ethnicity. Several founders are from the medical and scientific community at large, which is not made up of only one ethnic group last time I looked.

But it all must transcend to the crux of the biscuit: Should we not be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, especially if the wheat is really working its butt off? Should we just throw the baby out with the bath water, (love those clichés) for that matter, and chuck the best students into the pen with the animals (violent students, bad teachers, et.al.) that would rend and destroy them? We are not Communist China, not the old U.S.S.R. If you don’t offer the carrot, then no one will reach for it.

Ms. Scott, What The Heck are you thinking?!—that the public school system would actually meet a higher standard if not for the existence of charter schools? Public schools for years, engorged with huge sums, have been unable to meet acceptable national, let alone world standards.

Halting the development of charter schools won’t change that. But it might even things out just enough that mediocrity can continue to be the acceptable norm.

The Fresh Market at the Promenade Shops at Saucon Valley caters to a clientele supposedly both wealthy and educated, the upper crust of the provincial area. But often with education comes a feeling of social responsibility, at least in principle. Not necessarily in practice, as I found out one afternoon, while shopping there.

As I moseyed down the resplendent aisles tastefully arranged with delicacies unsuited to the pedestrian palette, I also encountered a cornucopia of the basic, everyman, homegrown victuals most Americans have come to know and love (and eat), like apples and oranges, bread, cheese, eggs, meat, and more.

And though I must admit that I would not choose to shop there for staple foods, I found myself on the verge of hunger and hoping to buy a few quick items for that night’s meal. As I waited in line to check out, I couldn’t help but notice the fresh faced patrons, a clean cut and prosperous looking bunch, people so wealthy that they didn’t even have to try hard to look wealthy.

But looks can be deceiving. I was there too, I with my paltry journalist’s pay, possibly on the brink of being eligible for food stamps in this uncertain economy.

The harsh reality is that one heck of a lot of people are out of work. The unemployment rate for Pennsylvania is dropping by increments only as people are dropping off the radar. People are moving back home with older parents, going on welfare, living off savings or if lucky, going back to school in hopes of job retraining. College graduates, educated professionals are for the first time experiencing what it is to become poor, to live on food stamps, perhaps, while considering downsizing to section 8 housing.

So when I got to the front of the line, I blurted out “Do you guys accept food stamps?” Not that I had them. I was at first only joking, but while standing in the cue I had been musing about how things were really getting tight and I might just see if I qualified for the SNAP (food stamp) program. I fully expected the friendly cashier to say “Of course we do!”–it was almost a given in my mind, for in this economy I couldn’t conceive of ANY food store choosing not to participate in the food stamp program.

I was told that Fresh Market does not accept food stamps. When I expressed surprise (which was really outrage forced into the thin guise of surprise), the cashier even agreed with me, surprised himself. Just to double check, I asked one of the front end managers who assured me that Fresh Market does certainly NOT accept food stamps. It seemed she was proud of that fact.

I asked both the cashier and the manager if this seemed like discrimination against the poor, but to that there was no reply. (Crickets chirping in the silence…)

It was all too weird to be true. I had to find out if this actually was the policy, if Fresh Market was so obsessed with its image as the hoity-toity gourmet that it had, like its wealthy human brethren, lost complete touch with reality, with the economy, with what was going on in the world.

I got in touch with Kristen Cowart, a public relations representative for Fresh Market, and asked her about the chain’s policies. She said, via email, ”The Fresh Market does not currently accept EBT cards or food stamps… because we have concluded that the costs associated with participating in the program currently outweigh the benefits for The Fresh Market and its customers.”

When asked about the costs of the SNAP program to retailers, Jean Daniel of the USDA said there was no cost to retailers. “Retailers are not required to accept the program, it’s a business decision. We’ve seen a number of stores come on board recently, (like) Target and Costco, mainly because retailers understand that’s part of a business model. We can’t compel retailers to accept the program”. Daniel says 85% of all retailers that accept SNAP are grocery stores.

When I got back to Kristen Cowart of Fresh Market, confronting her with the USDA policy, she said, via email, “It is true that there is no government-associated cost to participate in the SNAP and WIC programs; however the cost to retailers is in the payment systems – software, hardware, data entry and administration – required to process transactions using EBT.”  Does anyone think for even a moment that Fresh Market is not already paying for most if not all of the above costs?

But when asked if she was aware that a grocery store having a policy of not accepting food stamps could be interpreted as a form of financial discrimination against poorer people, there was no response.

It boils down to this:

What The Heck was Fresh Market thinking, denying poor people access to groceries? In this economy?! What an elitist approach to business and customer service. But I guess you want to keep the riff-raff out. And why would you think that people on food stamps or even welfare don’t deserve to have a few special foods when they want? No, these aid recipients may not be your targeted clientele, but they’re human beings, like you and me, and some of them may have recently been making a decent living before getting laid off when the big bad economy blew their roof in. Many may go on to make a heck of a lot more money than your average employee makes. Then they will be your targeted clientele, but they won’t shop with you then, because you denied them now!

Many of your current patrons, who though wealthy, have great social conscience, will be shocked and appalled to know that Fresh Market practices financial discrimination, which can, needless to say, often result in racial discrimination. Think about it.

Fresh Market to the poor: “Let them eat cake, but don’t let them do it here! Don’t you dare desire that slice of brie with your Saltine crackers and ketchup soup!”

Shakur Pfist to Fresh Market: You might care about your customers, but you don’t care about people.

Proud heads held high above arched necks with lashing manes, flowing tails streaming out behind, the jangle and creak of metal and leather tack drowned by the bitter strike of iron-shod hoofbeats against the pavement, the cavalcade proceeds with due authority to the town center, mounted officers weapons to the ready, to mete out justice with a swift hand…or taser.

Up until the last word one could imagine oneself back in the days before the conveniences of modern technology like cars or even bicycles, back in the days when a procession of armed soldiers, enforcers of the law was a display of brute force, an iron fist used both for the excitement of patriotism and for the subjugation of the populace.

But then there’s that pesky word “taser” that just doesn’t fit. That’s because a taser is a 21st century word: it fits in nicely with other 21st century words like iPod, Segway, and meme. But it just doesn’t seem to fit with the Old World image of the cop horse brigade.

That is to say nothing against horses, equestrianism, or the fine tourist attraction that Bethlehem’s mounted police have become. But was it really a wise spending choice for taxpayer money in these harsh economic times?

There are various well founded, legitimate arguments that Mayor John B. Callaghan could have made  in favor of the Bethlehem Mounted Unit, if only he would have answered our email forwarded to his Blackberry. But since the mayor has refused to respond to his constituency, and for the sake of having a more balanced article, here’s a proxy of the possible interview:

Cast:
Shakur Pfist—as Shakur Pfist, a journalist and columnist
Mayor John B. Callaghan, of Bethlehem, Pa.—-proxied by Shakur Pfist, journalist and columnist

Shakur Pfist: How many horses does the city currently have?

Mayor John B. Callaghan: We currently have two to seven horses. I know of at least  four, Raven and Hamlet, two Fresian quarter horses, and two huge Percherons, possibly named Flash and Pharoh, though may be others, possibly Risk, Cosmo, and Sluggo. (Alas, who would know? If the mayor did not know himself, he could have referred us to someone who might.)

Shakur Phist: The program was supposed to cost either $40-or$45,000 (depending on differing Morning Call Stories–can’t they get it right either?) for the start-up. How much has the program cost to date?

Mayor John B. Callaghan: (No to-date figures.) The program cost $40,000 (or $45,000) for its first year start-up expenses. After that, it will cost about $6,500 annually. (Or $10,000, depending on who you ask)

Shakur Phist: Who is funding this program?

Mayor John B. Callaghan: The taxpayers. The money comes from a federally funded law enforcement grant called a U.S. Justice Assistance Grant.

Shakur Pfist: What purpose does the program serve?

Mayor John B. Callaghan: Not only does the program step up police presence, but it serves a public relations function, allowing officers to interact with the public. It helps with crowd dispersion and allows officers greater visibility for spotting trouble.

“It’s another extension of community policing, which makes (officers) all the more approachable,” Callahan told JD Malone of the Express times.

The horses are stabled at the Burnside Plantation, a historical working farm where schoolchildren visit to learn about farm life in the 18 and 1900′s.

Not only would the horses step up police presence, Callahan said, but they would also add to the ambiance of the plantation. “This will really be a working farm,” Callahan said. “The horses may not be pulling plows, but they are there to do a job.” Callaghan told Nicole Radzievich of the Morning Call.

Shakur Pfist: Who cleans up after the horses when they defecate on the public streets?

Mayor John B. Callaghan: The police told me that they’re still working on that one.

Shakur Pfist: At Musikfest this past summer I randomly asked two police officers how they felt about the new (at that time) police horse program. Basically they said that it was a waste of money. When I asked whether it cost more than other things, say bicycles, they both replied yes, of course. When it was suggested that horses are unpredictable and could under certain circumstances become spooked and cause a physical danger to people, they agreed that it was definitely possible. Do you have any comments on these points?

Mayor John B. Callaghan: While it’s true that horses, improperly handled, could pose a hazard to people, the benefits of this program by far outweigh any problems. We’ve proved that it’s money well spent because of all the benefits the program has had for local outreach and education. We’ve returned a time-honored, stately tradition to the city of Bethlehem. Not only that, but we’ve improved yada yada yada…

My summation:

Well, the mayor could have gone on in this vein for even seconds with some very defensible, valid points–some very definite pro’s.

When told that police horses are great for crowd control I would counter, yeh, like that time during Musikfest 2009 when the horse stepped on Andrew Mutchler and when he shoved the horse off of his foot, the cops tackled him and his brother, Matthew Mutchler, tasing Matthew. Let’s see, horse steps on person, person rightfully freaks out, cops jump person and tasing commences. I’m interested to see whether these charges will stick. It sounds more like a situation that never would have happened under normal circumstances was created, necessitating law enforcement intervention. Sounds like someone trying to justify their job…but that’s for another post and another time.(You can find more of the story here: Police Use Stun Gun on Man in Musikfest Altercation and  Two Bethlehem Township, Pa., Men Face Trial for Alleged Musikfest Ruckus)

Like I said before, the word “taser” is  a 21st century word.

After all that, I would have gone on to note that bicycles are a more economical choice for taxpayer money, costing on the average less than $500 each, even for a good one. There is no cost for feeding and stabling them, there is no veterinary care cost, and possibly (and probably) it is a safer choice for everyone. See bike police.

Add to that, it’s highly debatable whether horses are any good for law enforcement. Several incidents at past Musikfests highlight these difficulties. People have been able to punch horses, and hit them with vehicles, eluding chase. Oddly this happened in 2002, a time during which, if one is to believe previous Lehigh Valley Live and Morning Call articles, there were no mounted police in Bethlehem. Both sources state in articles that this is the first time there has been a mounted unit since 1941, yet various other articles from both sources abound regarding incidents in other, more recent years.

For all the pros and cons, you can examine the links and make up your own mind. Perhaps if the mayor would simply say that it’s just good PR for the city and that the horses look quaint and enhance the downtown shopping experience, minus the law enforcement angle, we could all believe the program is worthwhile. Even better, if the program were privately funded by those who stand to capitalize from the publicity, we’d all smile as we stepped over the piles of manure.

But no matter what the mayor said or would have said, the primary thing is this: What The Heck?! are you and the Bethlehem City Council doing spending over $40K of taxpayer money to bring back an anachronistic system in the name of “law enforcement”? Your constituents and the rest of the American taxpayers are not unemployed and starving in some cases (YES! real cases of starvation in the U.S.!) to watch you shell out thousands of dollars that could go to job training for dislocated workers or to food banks for the poorest Americans.

Perhaps Mayor John B. Callaghan will remember in the future that it’s much better for journalists to report on his actual thoughts and words on a subject than conjecture what they might be because he’s too negligent to answer their questions or those of his constituency.

Just so you all know, Lehigh Valley What The Heck?! from time to time gives out what we call a BUMP!, our way of acknowledging something outstanding in the Lehigh Valley or beyond, that our readers can benefit from. In this case, you too can enjoy being treated like the awesome, respect-deserving person you are or might be.

A customer service BUMP! goes out to box office manager Kevin Acri at the PA Renaissance Faire at Mt. Hope Estate & Winery for providing great customer service.

He used his brain, something which a lot of people absolutely refuse to do, when administering a healthy dose of good customer service to one worried customer last Saturday.

The worried customer had non-refundable, non-exchangable tickets for one of the ‘Faire’s many Theatre in the Mansion performances, A Dickens of A Christmas, for that Saturday’s performance. The tickets were a Christmas gift for the customer’s young son, but the child being sick that weekend prevented the family from attending. The customer called up and got the kindest, most considerate treatment. When the problem was explained, Kevin knew exactly what to do. The choice was before him:

1. Either go: “DUH! No we can’t do that, we are mindless robots, our policy is written in stone, and we draw the line on good customer service. You SUCK, no Merry Christmas for YOU!”
2. OR go “Don’t you worry about that, we want you to have a GREAT experience here, we want you to know that we value you as a person and are willing to listen, we’re flexible, because we want you to keep coming back, tell everyone about how we’ll do all we can to go the extra mile, and above all we want you to have a Merry Christmas!”

Kevin Acri chose door number 2. The prize is….A NEW CAR!….No, not really. But the prize is big indeed.  You get a BUMP! from Lehigh Valley What The Heck?!–It’s all the good press we can share with the Lehigh Valley and beyond! Plus, it’s the knowledge that you made a real, human connection that could cause a positive chain reaction for you and the business your work for. This is good business Karma.

On the scary side (let the business beware), if it had gone the other way one never knows what might have happened. This story underscores how businesses today really have to be mindful of how they treat customers. One literate person, well-connected, and ticked off, can help tear a company down pretty fast during hard economic times.

Kevin had the brains to know that customer service is not one-size-fits-all. Each issue that arises is distinct and should be treated so. Kevin knew that it was no skin off his or the company’s nose to simply change the dates for the customer, if openings were available. The company lost no money and garnered the good will of not just one family, but of people all around the Lehigh Valley and beyond. The degree of separation is much less nowadays, with the advent of technology. Businesses and their employees need to know this and act accordingly. So, Kudos, Kevin!

Final analysis: Good customer service takes common sense and a willingness to see people as people, not problems. And there’s a warning implied: Being inflexible is the same as being unable to adapt. And we all know what happens to species that don’t adapt. They’re selected out for extinction.

A word to the wise: Don’t hand anyone an axe if you don’t want them to grind it.

By now everyone in the Lehigh Valley has probably read the article in USA Today about how federal government employees’ salaries are skyrocketing through the roof. After perusing the article myself, as well as several of the whining comments from the poor federal employees themselves, I feel it qualifies for a  “What The Heck?!”, meaning that EVERYONE in the Lehigh Valley and the rest of the United States SHOULD be morally outraged!

What is really ridiculous is the puerile whining of federal employees bemoaning their plight and how they struggle with salaries well over the national median income, crying about how they deserve these raises, these bloated salaries. There are just a few points any government worker should remember when taking the job:

1. Your salary is paid by taxpayers. This means that you personally are answerable to them for your income. Going into any government job you had better expect questioning and to be asked to justify your value. At least, in a world where taxpayers had some sort of control over these expenses you would have to expect that.  Lucky for you, though, today’s taxpayers  have no control over the setting of your salaries. We are helpless to fight your bureaucracy (unless we join it as some of you have suggested), because we don’t make the rules–you do. But we still have to pay. And you still get your salary, deserved or not. The least you all could do is be a little gracious about it and let the country vent, since you know we are powerless to do anything about it, legally. And don’t tell me we can vote the legislators out–the new ones just become part of the problem and the system.
2. All the complaining about how government employees make supposedly 26% less than their counterparts in the private sector, whether true or not, is completely irrelevant. The private sector gets to decide what they want to pay its employees because it’s their business. They have a choice, and we citizens have a choice whether or not we want to patronize their businesses to support their operations, including salaries. Viva La Capitalism! You, O government employee, are part of the public sector. You are not supposed to be profiting from people who have no choice but to pay your salary. If you want higher salaries, go into the private sector and compete, like everyone else. But wait!…that’s right…you don’t have to, because taxpayers have no choice in deciding what you get paid.
3. According to the USA Today article, “the growth in six-figure salaries has pushed the average federal worker’s pay to $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector”. If true, and I think it is, this means that your salaries are actually 76.5% higher than those in the private sector, not lower. Um, Houston… it seems we have a bit of a problem…

The bottom line for all of us average Joe’s is this: Just like “some people” think war is good for an economy,
“some people” also seem to think that a recession (or depression) is a good time for government employees to grab a hold of all the loose cash flying around in the name of economic recovery. It’s a contrived and twisted phenomenon where members of the bureaucracy think they can just sweep their doings and our rights under the rug. Then, when they’re found out, they’re downright indignant.

Just examine some of the comments these federal employees left in response to USA Today’s story, to see that they are a demented bunch of rats feeding off the rotting carcass that is today’s economy. I have to hand it to Obama, (and I even voted for him), his approval of only a 2% salary boost for 2010 is apparently the lowest bite pushed by a US president since 1975. Nice try, but not nice enough. George W. was more guilty of these scandalous pay raises, recommending a total of 6.9% in pay raises. And this is on top of regular 1.5% yearly raises.

Gee, it would be nice to get a cost of living raise each year. Not one person I know has a job where this is offered. It’s an antiquated practice that’s been phased out over the years, for everyone but the highest paid Americans. I must run with the wrong crowd or something.

So, a final note to all you whiners, oops, I mean federal employees:
Quit your complaining! You got away with it–again!

How many times have you experienced complete and total outrage, righteous indignation, and downright indignity at something  insane and totally crazy (“We got both kinds, Country and Western!”) that’s happened in the news, or the evil and unconscionable way you were treated when you went into a local business, or when confronted with some random or idiotic policy that most sentient beings would know runs counter to any reasonable objective the policy maker would have? Don’t you wonder…

1. How they get away with behaving in the manner they do and still retain their job in this volatile economy?
2. How they can look themselves in the eye when they look in the mirror without infinite loathing and disgust?
3. Why people, yea all you great citizens of the world don’t rise up and do something about (enter issue here)?

We could add more to this list, ad infinitum.

This story tracks a clear example of number 1. in the list above, a Lehigh Valley store owner who, in order to compete with huge box stores  decided to draw the line at good customer service and deny a long time customer the use of a valuable coupon because it was a couple of days past the expiration date.  A huge fan of our local mom and pop’s, every holiday season this customer patronizes many local Lehigh Valley shops and small businesses. But this year, unfortunately, and probably for all years after they will have to alter this routine.

This long time customer asked the owner of this store if he would honor the coupon…after all, it was only a couple of days past the expiration date. The owner knew the customer for several years and also knew that this particular customer had spent several hundred dollars a year there for the last 10 years.

However, this store owner, in this hard economy and in the holiday spirit, chose to draw the line. After all, he had to draw the line somewhere.

The customer was denied use of the coupon, but she was told that she would get a new, but less valuable one in her email. This new coupon never came, and when she notified an employee of the store that she never got one and asked would they at least now send her a new one, the employee attacked her verbally like a mad dog, castigated and chastised her as if she was a child, and as an afterthought rudely told her that they would honor the smaller coupon if she came in, but that she didn’t really deserve the coupon, implying that the coupon had been emailed already and that the customer was just lying about it.

Customer service at its best!

In this tight economy and in this age of large box stores where small businesses have only product specialization and customer service as points on which to compete, does this make sense? Was this decision in the store owner’s best interest? One customer service mistake compounded by another?

This store owner sacrificed hundreds of dollars from a known customer to draw the line and save himself what amounts to about 4 dollars. But he just had to draw the line.

What should have happened? Our take on it:

The owner would have lost nothing if he had simply honored the original coupon. Many other businesses do this. This particular coupon was direct mailed. As a business owner you know, when doing this, that you can expect a certain number of people to take you up on your offer. It should be built into your budget, or don’t offer a coupon in the first place.

By honoring the coupon the customer would feel valued and of course continue shopping there. For 4 dollars, this business owner alienated a long time customer and lost hundreds and perhaps thousands of dollars of business from local people, whom he relies upon. Word of this kind spreads rapidly among friends and family, especially with new technology and at this time of year when everyone is looking for bargains and good experiences.

One piece of advice to that business owner: If you can’t compete on prices, you better have excellent customer service. People are willing to pay a little more for specialized products and courteous service, and NOT willing at all to pay more for being treated shabbily. We also think you’d better fire your overly aggressive employee and get yourself a new personality…and a new business where  you don’t have to deal with people.

Season’s Greetings

For those of you new to Lehigh Valley What The Heck?!, our blog has a duel mission: To support this and all communities by providing an alternative source for news and information, arts and entertainment with journalistic integrity as well as subjective commentary on those stories (duh, repetitively redundant, huh? After all, isn’t commentary by nature subjective?), humor, expressions of mortal outrage (opinion), and feedback (criticism…and in some cases censure).

Our reporters and writers pride themselves on keeping one foot in the time-honored tradition of journalism and the other in the cyber world of citizen journalism in the new media, all the while pleasurably riding that hard, throbbing fence that barely separates the two worlds.

It boils down to this: We may present the news with a balanced or unbiased approach, only later, and in the final analysis to break it down from our own perspective. In the old days of the crusading journalists, the freedom fighters who waged war on the corrupt and morally degenerate old boys’ networks, members of which dubbed them “muckraker”, there was no such thing as “objective journalism”. How can something perceived by humans be objective?

Our goal is to achieve balanced reporting while freely providing citizen perspective…we admit it, we’re proud of it. We take pains to differentiate and categorize one perspective from the other so the reader gets it. This is not a satire. This is not a test. This ain’t no party, this ain’t no disco, this ain’t no foolin’ around.

This is Lehigh Valley What The Heck?!