Eric Wise

# re: You never know who you're dealing with

Genius!  Way to go Nextel!

Foot meet gun.  Gun meet foot.

# re: You never know who you're dealing with

I assume that the $200 disconnect fee was actually a termination fee specified in his contract. In exchange, he probably got a free or deeply discounted phone. I fail to see the rudeness or unfairness that Nextel is exhibiting by insisting your friend live up to his contractual obligation.

Whether or not his employer is (or is negotiating to be one) also a Nextel customer is irrelevant. Furthermore, I'd say it borders on unethical for him to even bring that to the discussion, as he is attempting to personally benefit from his government position and authority to negotiate purchasing contracts. Basically, he's asking for his personal contract with Nextel to be modified in exchange for Nextel getting the school district's contract. Reopening the negotations as retaliation pretty much proves the point. I'm sure Verizon was already considered in the original RFP phase.

# re: You never know who you're dealing with

I guess it depends on your ethical viewpoint.  If I was in a position where I was negotiating the purchase of several dozen cellular plans and one would overlap with my plan I would certainly ask the vendor to waive the termination fee for my plan.  This is especially so since the contract clause in question is to prevent people from signing up and leaving after sucking up the benefits, since he was not actually leaving Nextel but instead gaining them thousands of dollars in new contracts I don't see how it is unreasonable to ask for the termination fee on that single phone to be waived.

Whether it is a "proper" response to kill the negotiations in place is debatable.  If I had a bad service experience with a components vendor like Telerik or Infragistics I certainly wouldn't turn around and recommend their product to any client of mine.

# re: You never know who you're dealing with

It's unreasonable because you are (supposedly) not bringing them business for a fee, but rather because it's the best thing for the company you represent.

As a gov't employee, it's also a tighter ethical line than a consultant. Seeing as how those new contracts are to be paid with taxpayer dollars, I'd like to be assured that the person negotiating them isn't influenced by personal deals. What would be the difference if Nextel just tacked the $200 fee onto the school board's bill and took it off your friend's? Or just cut him a check for $200 as a finder's fee? Sure, it's a little more blatant, but the effect is the same.

As a consultant, I too would not recommend a product that I had a bad customer service experience with (at least not without caveats, and assuming there's a reasonable alternative). Of course, I don't think being obligated to live up to my contract is a bad CS experience, but if they were actually rude to him I can understand it.

But, as a gov't employee (I'm both), I'm obliged to avoid any appearance of impropiety. That means that personally, I can't benefit from my position.  That means no vendor paid lunches, gifts, or junkets. I fail to see how attempting to tie your personal contract to a business deal is any different.

# re: You never know who you're dealing with

The propriety or lack thereof, to me, would hinge here on whether this was his general-use-personal Nextel unit, or one which he had acquired to enable his performance of his duties for the business. If it was the latter, and the business (in this case school system, not PRECISELY a governmental organization, depending on the state and municipality... weird stuff there) has since decided to make a group contract to cover both the use of that phone for business purposes, and others, then... Definitely, I agree with Eric in this case. (Seemingly good litmus test: was he being reimbursed some percentage of the cost of the phone as an expense? Was it only business use that was reimbursed or all cost of the phone?)

On the other hand, if it's just his personal nextel that he's looking to lose, it may be redundant now, but carrying both does encourage a good separation of 'for business' and 'for everything else' usage.

# re: You never know who you're dealing with

Verizon is better anway :)