Talk:Convergys Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Convergys Corporation article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Ohio Portal Convergys Corporation is part of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.

	Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
Stub	rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

Contents 1 Work Enviroment 2 Benefits 3 Talk Page Cleanup 4 The ConvergysSucks website. 5 Philippines

[edit] Work Enviroment

• The quality of work varies GREATLY from contract to contract, and from location to location. Also, depending on your position. Some people love the place, but the vast majority think it's a joke, or absolutely dread coming to work.
• I'm one of those.

See, I don't understand this issue... probably because I'm in the Erlanger location with a beautiful new building, great coworkers, and great pay. There's nothing to complain about in my opinion. ·:RedAugust 17:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

• This company is Fortune's list of Most Admired. I understand why. This company is run like a sweatshop. This company underpays professional positions in an extreme manner. I ask that other Convergys employees list their position and hourly pay / yearly salary:

Traffic Analyst (This company won't even give proper titles, internally I'm a Command Center Associate) $30k/year. That's about the 5th percentile for my state, median being approximately $44k/year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.126.180.20 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Benefits

• Regarding benefits, there are a fair amount in place, but some are nearly impossible to use. Their RRSP contributions are decided after you've contributed for the year, so there is no way to tell how much they will match until your year is over. For tuition/professional fee reimbursement, I've seen quite a few examples where they won't pay. A classic example is someone going to HR, warning that they are taking this or that course beforehand. The HR rep says "Great, thanks for letting us know, go for it, come back with you bills/certificate/diploma and we'll get that fixed up." Said person comes back after, and HR tells them they needed to submit X or Y paperwork before hand to be eligable. Usually if you ask HR, they insist there is nothing to do beforehand. I've seen this several times. This also often happens with employee referal bonuses, as well.
  • I work for Convergys and it is not too bad. They offer all sorts of benefits and discounts and tuition re-imbursment.
    • They also offer unlimited internet access ...
      • They do not offer access at my site it is prohibbited to use the internet except for direct customer needs. Also the link www.convergyssucks.com is of no factual or reference value, please stop re-adding it as it is in violation of WP:EL --Magosis 23:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk Page Cleanup

• Just did a touch of housekeeping here folks. Hope it was appropriate. I did not remove any comments, but lets keep in mind this is not a forum for discussing problems or opinions regarding convergys. Magosis 07:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The ConvergysSucks website.

Two things, first off I beleive that the bloggers website which connects people who work for convergys all across the world should be added this the "convergys" submission. It is an unofficial site true, yet has many many valid things to say about working there.

The second item is that I could see how this link would not go up as "convergys" would not want it up. this is not a valid argument. The convergyssucks website holds some very valid information and vents for people working at the sites as well has specific threads talking about ways to improve convergys.

Regardless, this website, has a very strong connection with employees of convergys, which really make up the company and therefore should be on.

thank you Logan.symington 18:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC) , logan

• The problem here is not that the site is unofficial. If you look at the Wikipedia pages for large companies you will see mentions of criticism and links to non-corporate sites. This is perfectly acceptable. The issue is that the ConvergysSucks site is a discussion forum. While the Convergys employees that have grievances against the company have every right to express them, external links to discussion forums are to be avoided according to Wikipedia's External Linking policy.--Areia

Ok, this is interesting, I assume then that the policy change (of no linking to forums) is a fairly recent change to the rules, I recall only two weeks ago when the link was on. Now I am wondering why the rule was changed, what makes forums so "bad" or unwanted as to not be usefull as external links. Logan Symington Logan.symington 13:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think it's very recent, definitely not a matter of weeks. When the link was first added shortly after I created the article I remember leaving it, and even re-adding it when someone removed it, because I thought it had a certain relevance. It was only when someone later on pointed out that policy link that I started removing it whenever it was added. The link gets added regularly, and sometimes it takes a little while before someone removes it, which might explain why you saw it. As for the policy itself, based on the other 'to be avoided' items in that list, I would guess the problem with forum sites is the lack of recognized authority. Wikipedia's been trying hard to move toward articles having verifiable sources; I guess forum sites don't fit that profile. --Areia 03:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philippines

Can someone please explain the significance of the Philipines paragraph and why it stands out from the rest of the company? --Shuki (talk) 22:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)