SUBMITTED: Tuesday, August 03, 2004
POSTED: Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Good grief, Reid. If you really think that TCT would be thrilled about anything I wrote (with the possible exception of ONLY my first post), you're deluded. Hell, they didn't even like it when I wrote that initial positive report.
That first post, which I wrote after a few DAYS as an employee, with an obviously limited amount of information at my disposal at the time...well, you'd think they'd be okay with that, right? But no, they weren't.
SO...I sincerely doubt they would be thrilled with my subsequent follow-up commentary, and I certainly don't except any brownie points. (Why would I want any from a bad company that I chose to leave?)
First off, my initial research didn't uncover anything negative about TCT *except* the Ripoff Report. I suspect this was because they had just changed their name and because they were new to my area. At any rate, I wasn't expecting to find anything bad. I was a new employee and things looked pretty good the first day or two. Also, I didn't have much time to really dig around, but when I found the Ripoff Report, it was, AT THAT TIME, the first and ONLY negative commentary I'd seen.
As a result, I decided that either some ex-employee must have posted a negative post for whatever reason, and thus it could be dismissed, OR some recruited talent was misinformed about what TCT offers. AT LEAST AT FIRST I believed that. It was the first negative commentary I'd found, after all.
This is why I keep mentioning that TCT doesn't claim to be an agency. This is not in any way meant to excuse them. It is related to the first post I read, and it explains why I responded as I did. I believed that the complainant wasn't listening closely, perhaps because she was overly excited by the glamorous (ha) videos shown at open calls. That she therefore believed TCT was an agency and that the only reason she griped was because TCT wasn't BEING an agency.
Then it occurred to me that a new employee might have misled the poor girl, either by forgetting to stress what TCT claims to be (i.e., not an agency, right) or by being morally bankrupt and deliberately misleading her that TCT WAS an agency.
So I wrote my first report and spouted the party line. Didn't have any other information to go on, as a newbie. Only had the one negative post to refer to. So I truly believed that TCT wasn't evil, and that the complainant was mistaken on some level. Either she lied to herself (by wanting to believe she was a potential model, I mean) OR someone failed to make it clear to her what TCT did (or, rather, what AT THAT TIME I believed and was told they did) OR a new employee was overly eager to get warm bodies to show up at an open call and thus they lied (which I thought--and STILL think--is wrong...which is ALSO why I stress that I never lied to potential talent).
That is why I wrote what I did, and that is why I continue to mention those things. I am referring to prior discussions in earlier reports on this page, all of which I have read prior to responding to them. It is BECAUSE I have read each post and made an attempt to figure out who is responding to what, a courtesy some people perhaps don't bother with, that it comes up at all. It is NOT because I am taking TCT's side about it.
I honestly am baffled about why I'm having to re-re-re-re-clarify something I thought I had already made clear, but the perception apparently STILL remains that I'm excusing TCT in some way RATHER THAN clarifying earlier points in prior postings.
At any rate, when I found that first negative report, I was such a happy little camper during those first few days that I innocently re-posted my report (thatg would be the FIRST one I posted here) defending TCT to the intranet forums TCT employees have access to.
And it was censored.
Yep. It defended them and was still censored. That confused me, since I was a happy newbie, and I couldn't figure out why they felt a need to censor ANYTHING, especially not a post SUPPORTING them. Which I did, the first few days I worked there.
So. I asked questions and was told that even just TALKING about someone posting ripoff reports would only encourage other newbies to GO DO RESEARCH.
Now, you're probably thinking exactly what I thought then: WHY would it be bad if newbies did research? Right? Why on earth would encouraging people to check out their new company be a BAD thing?
Well, it would only be BAD if they had something to hide. If they were, in fact, a CRAPPY SCAM of a business. Correct?
Whereas a GOOD company would be more than happy for you to investigate them to your heart's content AND post what you found. Because they'd have nothing to hide. Logical, no?
Hello! That was a BIG warning bell!
Therefore I told my boss at the time that I thought that censoring posts--especially SUPPORTIVE ones!--sent the wrong message and explained why I thought so. I said to her that it looked like maybe the naysayers had a valid point (WHICH THEY DO!). I also just plain disagreed with censoring non-abusive, supportive, business-related information on the business-related forums.
Guess what? She argued with me. And that is what encouraged me to look further into things. Like I said, I couldn't figure out why a GOOD company would be afraid that employees might do some looking around online.
So, I could maybe attribute ONE site with ONE bad report to a disgrunted ex-employee with an axe to grind...MAYBE they were a bad employee.
Or, I could perhaps attribute ONE bad report to somebody who got recruited and wanted so badly to hear what they wanted to hear and believe it was a real model agency that they were pissed to find out it wasn't after they bought the service...PERHAPS they should have listened better before signing anything.
Those speculations were reasonable ones AT THE TIME, given the information I had. NOW, of course, neither of us would make those assumptions. There have been too many additional complaints and comments.
So I could assume that the ONE and ONLY bad report I'd ever seen (AT THAT TIME) was a fluke...UNTIL I found more. And I could NOT explain SEVERAL sites with negative information about TCT, which is what a more in-depth search revealed to me. Not just ONE angry person. Not just TWO. There were and are dozens, if not HUNDREDS, of angry people--both ex-employees as well as unhappy recruited talent.
That isn't something you can explain away to yourself, even if you WANT to believe your new company doesn't suck. ONE negative post, yes. That MIGHT be just one person angry with TCT for whatever reason....even Microsoft, which is reputable, has pissed-off former employees and product purchasers.
But when I found not just ONE but MANY, MANY, MANY posts? Hell, no. That's not a fluke or a personal agenda. That's a problem being exposed and discussed.
So, after the censorship issue acting as a wake-up call, I got online again one morning, still curious about the company that just hired me and for which I was slaving away, and I quickly found out that TCT was not offering a legitimate service. I also read some horror stories and news articles.
Now, I was already annoyed that I'd put in long hours and had nothing to show for it but more expenditures than income.
The censorship issue peeved me even more. It was the first big wake-up call, one I didn't get from the ONE AND ONLY complaint post here that I'd read. And I have explained why that ONE negative post didn't act like a warning bell the way the censorship did. If it wasn't the first and only complaint that I had seen (AT THAT TIME), I would not have written a post defending TCT. But it WAS the first and only that I had seen, and I was a newbie scout, and I thought I was being told the truth.
Frankly, it never occurred to me to even THINK about whether or not I was being told a lie--I don't expect to be lied to by my new boss. All of my former bosses, other than those at TCT, had always been truthful with me about what their company did / does and what they expected me to do.
Anyway.
I was additionally annoyed that, as a new employee, I had exceed the goals set for me regarding recruited talent coming to open calls and supposedly won a cash incentive prize which then was downgraded into something far less useful or desirable (IMVHO), e.g., my Very Own TCT Online Account, for which I'd get to pay $20 a month to maintain it, blah blah blah. Well, hold me back. Woo! (Not.) Note that I had and have no desire to do any modeling these days. So why would I want this, even if I WASN'T already starting to have suspicions about things? Answer: I wouldn't. Give me the promised award.
But that last thing's a minor quibble. It only demonstrates that TCT doesn't play it straight with anyone, not even their employees. Basically, getting money to flow OUT of TCT is next to impossible, whereas they are always up for having more come in (even from their GROSSLY underpaid newbie employess who have zero personal interest in their services).
At any rate, I was already suspicipous because of the censorship, and I was now armed with more than one complaint. I'd made time to get online and sniff around after the censorship issue made me wonder. I found more complaints and bad reviews and so on.
So, armed with NEW information that contradicted much of what I'd been told, I went back in that afternoon at open call and asked my bosses some pointed questions. I did not receive any useful answers.
THEN I was further annoyed to find out about the Lou Perlman connection.
Again, prior to TCT, I hadn't ever worked for an employer that didn't provide a useful service, that misrepresented itself, or anything like that. It never occurred to me that I'd be hired by a scam company. I hadn't ever been scammed myself and it simply isn't something I anticipated. In the past, when I got a good job, I worked my butt off to please my new boss(es) and did well. I had no reason AT FIRST not to want to go out and do my best.
Naivete--and being mis- or un-informed and then sharing what information you have been given--is quite different from indulging in deliberate deception and I never deliberately deceived anyone. In fact, I was VERY clear to potential clients that I was not an agency rep but instead I was working for a company that (CLAIMED they) provided a service for agencies.
I don't know what about all that is so difficult to fathom. I don't know why anyone would think it was appropriate to be insulting or derogatory, no matter how angry they are with TCT. I am not TCT. I haven't worked for them since, what, January or February of 2002? I was there long enough to get one crappy paycheck, and I left after I could not get any decent explanations for my concerns.
Now. I COULD have left my initial rah-rah-TCT-yay post stand unamended. In fact, I would have forgotten all about posting it at all, but someone added a report and I got an e-mail nudge about it. Since I then had additional information, I shared it. I did not have to.
It is ironic that I did not get ANY abuse for the pro-TCT post, but I have gotten REPEATEDLY crapped on now that I am posting additional reports admitting that hey, I got fooled and taken advantage of, too. That I actually worked for those buttmunches and that didn't protect me from getting scammed, albeit in a different way.
And for my effort, I had people here (who AGREE with me that people should be warned about TCT!)expending a great amount of their energy trying to insult or discredit me and complaining because I chose not to use more toned-down language than they would choose to use when discussing my former employer.
It really isn't in my nature to bash anything, much less a former job. I don't make a point of going out of my way to complain or be negative, especially on a public forum. I would vastly prefer that my former employer was reputable and that I COULD let the initial supportive comments stay up there without clarifying myself later on.
But I did clarify things regardless of my dislike of negativity because my initial report was glowingly supportive enough of TCT that I could not in good conscience leave that up there with my name attached without ALSO sharing what I learned AFTER I posted it. That, yes, BOTTOM LINE, TCT scams people. Not just potential talent--which is HEINOUS and EVIL enough--but also their employees.
All of which sucks on so many levels that I don't even have to go into it. You KNOW it sucks. It's all been said, over and over. It sucks, it's vile business practice, and it is just self-destructive and stupid to boot--you'd think that a company indulging in scam behavior would try to keep employees happy rather than giving them a reason to re-think their decision to work for them. When you give people a reason to poke around--because they finally sense that they are being misled--it no doubt inspires at least SOME (like me) to go do some additional research homework on their own time.
To put it in elementary vocabulary, a happy employee is more than willing to believe they are being told the truth and that their new job is super cool. An unhappy employee starts trying to figure out why, specifically, they are unhappy and how to fix it and whether or not they want to continue to work at a job that contributes to unhappy feelings rather than happy ones.
So what do we, in essence, agree about? Let's see:
Yes, they are a scam. Bottom line, you can't get away from this basic truth. THEY--meaning whatever name TCT is calling itself now--ARE PERPETRATING A SCAM.
Yes, they walk a fine line when they point out they aren't an agency. It makes it hard to nail them legally, but it is certainly an ethical lapse. And it's what I thought the original poster's gripe was all about--that she had somehow gotten the wrong idea. Or, perhaps, that a former employee was committing mischief. NOW I know different.
Yes. Anyone who KNOWS they are a scam and continues to work for them is a jerk. If you don't know they are a scam and you work for them, you're not evil, just uninformed. So GET informed--just go do some research. You won't want to work for them after you do.
Yes, their "service" is, at best, about as helpful as buying a lottery ticket. It is, I guess, TECHNICALLY possible for talent to get jobs and make money, but what percentage of them actually do? And how many of THOSE jobs are for non-TCT-related events?
Guess what else? They tell their employees that their clients give them high approval ratings. As a new employee, you think that's a sign that they DO offer a good deal to clients. The numbers sure LOOK good!
What they don't tell you is how they select the sample of clients they poll. The few that actually get some work are the ones that are polled, and they are always polled as quickly as possible--before disenchantment sets in. Think also about this: if you ask only one person their opinion, and you pick one of the few that are happy with your service, then STATISTICALLY whatever that person says will give you a sampling of 100% positive results. What they do is choose a very select and small sampling of all paying clients to poll. And I think it was Mark Twain who said "there are lies, and there are damn lies, and then there are statistics".
It's also technically possible for employees to last more than a couple of weeks, to tell the truth (at least the truth as they know it) to people they try to scout, to try to show a good work ethic and thus stay employed, and to eventually come to the realization that they were lied to and that everything they were told as a newbie is, at best, suspect.
For one, senior scouts all swear that they started out as newbie scouts. But that isn't true. Some people are recruited right into management positions. And, as I said, solely to give my former co-workers every benefit of the doubt, SOME of those people might very well be deluded as to the nature of the company. I don't BELIEVE this, but it is POSSIBLE.
It's not that hard to understand why people get rooked, be it potential talent OR employees. They keep newbies incredibly busy for the first few weeks. You have hours and hours of meetings nearly every day of the week when you first are hired. You are sent out with a senior scout and hustled about as you try to learn how to approach total strangers with what is essentially a sales pitch. If you're naturally shy, that alone takes all of your attention: getting over your own introversion in order to perform your job duties. You then work and work until your feet and back hurt from tromping around malls and clubs and god knows where else and then you go home when the bars close at 3 or 4 AM (where everyone BUT you was having a drink and having fun while you were trying to workworkworkWORKwork) and you collapse into your bed. You certainly don't want to putter around on the Internet doing research when you feel dead on your feet. And you are so busy, initially, that you really don't have time to ask yourself if you're happy, much less any more involved questions.
In fact, I would bet that, out of the few people who DO do research after they get the job, most only get online after their first paycheck arrives (IF it arrives, that is--TCT seems to have a problem with paying people for their time OR their so-called commissions). After that first disappointing payday, you naturally start reassessing your new position and deciding whether or not to bother to stick with it or quit.
It's not evil to try to stay employed and work your butt off, especially when you haven't learned that you're being lied to yet. It WOULD be evil to continue to work for a company AFTER you found out that they were scamming people. The DAY I got online and found out they were a scam, the DAY I got some additional information that filled in some gaps in the information I already had and which revealed that there was a lot the company was lying BY OMISSION about (and a lie is a lie), I went in and asked my boss some questions. She could not answer them to my satisfaction. Thus I quit. I didn't hang in there and continue to try and recruit people. I left and didn't darken their door again or return calls from co-workers. I don't like being lied to.
Now. Is that more clear?
How about we focus on TCT, now, and not each other? Sound like a good plan to you?
Like you said, neither of US is the Bad Guy. But the Bad Guy sure benefits if we're sniping at each other rather than actually discussing how TCT scams people and why we think that is a bad thing. We could even discuss what victims could DO about it. Anything rather than wasting time NOT discussing the real issue.
When we bitch at each other, TCT benefits. Every minute spent fighting with other posters is one less minute we spend talking about what TCT does. It does not help. Strangers wandering onto the site are likely to discount the very valid points and observations made precisely because of the nasty off-topic comments.
So yeah, I accept your apology. I just hope you meant it.
Keep fighting the good fight, kid.