oh, the drama!

[mamajoan]

First of all, an update on the bed situation. Mom did bring over the new bed for Ruthie, and we dismantled the crib and when I saw how much bother it was going to be to take the crib pieces down to the basement, I gave up that idea and just posted the dang thing on freecycle. So last night a couple came by with their SUV and took the crib away. I hope I did an adequate job of explaining how to put it back together. They seemed to get it. Anyway, they have pictures (I posted a couple of pix on my freecycle listing) which hopefully will guide them.

Ruthie hasn't slept in the new bed yet though. On Tuesday night I thought it would be too much disruption for her since she was already upset over all the commotion with the crib disassembly and bringing in the new bed and then Isaac going off with grandma. Last night I was determined to put her down in the new bed, but, uh, I didn't. Well, I tried once and she woke up and cried and then I lost my nerve. sigh. So she once again spent the night in my bed, latched on to the boob for the entire 8 hours or whatever it was.

This sentence shall serve as a placeholder for more blather re Ruthie and the sleep situation and my reluctance, or inability, to do much about it, primarily because I'm conflicted in my feelings about it and also because by the time it gets to bedtime and I'm already worn out, I end up taking the path of least resistance even though I know I shouldn't. Wow, some placeholder eh?

But anyway the real thing I wanted to post about was the recent daycare drama that has been going on.

It all started, actually, a couple of weeks ago when there was a note in all parents' cubbies saying that the daycare center director, Dana, had gone to "pursue other opportunities" effective immediately. And I mean immediately, like, I never saw hide or hair of her again. No goodbyes, no transition period, nothin'. So that was a bit mysterious, but I haven't gotten up the nerve yet to ask Ruthie's teachers whether they know any dirt.

So then there ensued a couple of weeks during which a series of women, presumably from the head office (the daycare is part of a national chain), were in and out taking care of administrative stuff. Then on Monday, there was a big sign in the lobby saying that parents were invited to a "meet-and-greet" on Wednesday (yesterday) with the new director, Missy something-or-other.

Then on Tuesday, I arrived to pick Ruthie up and her teacher had a stack of envelopes with parents' names on it, and she was going through it as the parents arrived, like "here's one for you, one for you, nope I don't have one for you" and she gave me one. Intriguing. Not everybody got one, so what could it be?

Well, it was a letter from the head office informing me that a "review of records" had indicated that my account was overdue by $X (equal to one week's tuition) and that tuition is due by 6:00 p.m. every Thursday without exception (this part was bolded in the letter) and that I would be expected to pay a service charge of $5 per day. And -- this was the part that got me going -- if the payment was not received by 6pm on Wednesday (the day after I was reading this letter), then they would "no longer be able to provide [their] services to [me]" as of Friday. OMGWTF!

I mean, less than one week's notice?? I miss ONE week's payment (or they think I missed it) and suddenly they're going to kick me out by Friday?? Maybe that's typical policy, but I've never encountered that before. At all the previous daycares we've used, I've occasionally been a day or two late with my payment and nothing was ever said. (Not even at the one that was part of the same chain that this place is part of!) The assumption always was that as long as I paid up promptly in general, the occasional day or two of lateness was no big deal. I certainly presume that if I were the chronically late type, or if a particular payment were late by more than a few days, they might have said something; but that never happened.

Anyway, I did think it was just barely possible that I had spaced out on one week's payment, but I checked my checkbook and this was not the case. I have paid faithfully every Thursday, and as of the time I checked it on Tuesday evening, all but the last check had cleared.

So the next morning (Wednesday/yesterday) I stopped in to the office and talked to the woman who was there that day. As I said above, there had been a stream of different women in and out, so it didn't occur to me to ask this woman whether she was the new director, Missy -- but later it turned out that she was. When I was talking to her I didn't know this though, so I approached her as if she were any random administrative person, who was not at fault necessarily, but whose job at the moment was to handle these things. I basically said that a) my account was NOT overdue and b) I took offense at the tone of the letter. To the latter she replied that the wording of the letter was not her responsibility (which I certainly believe; I'm sure it's a boilerplate that the corporate offices provide) and that indeed it is corporate policy to kick you out that quickly. To the former, she said that they had been hearing a lot of this and were not sure whether Dana (the ex-director) had made a deposit and not noted it, or filed some checks wrong, or who knows what; but they were looking into it. She took down the check numbers for all the checks I had written and noted which was the one that hadn't cleared yet. (Then I went to the office and checked my online banking and found that that one HAD cleared.)

So later yesterday evening I went to the "meet-and-greet" (briefly) and found out that the aforementioned woman was Missy, the new director. And I told her about the last check clearing and she said they were still looking into it. Later still, around 6:45 when I was at home with the kids, I got a call from the woman at the daycare named Joan, who is the coordinator (or some such title) of the infant and toddler programs. She said that they had determined that some payments had been deposited into the wrong account (whatever that means) and it was all straightened out and my account was not overdue, no worries.

What I wish I had said, both to her and to Missy -- and what I may yet try to say to them, and to write in a letter to the head office -- is this: It's not about the money per se. I had every confidence that the money thing itself would be straightened out, because I can prove that I wrote those checks and they were cashed. So I wasn't worried about that. No, what it's really about is the idiocy of the way you went about this.

Listen, when you fire a top-management person (note I don't know for a fact that she was fired, but I'm guessing) and you start looking at her records and discover that large numbers of customers appear to be overdue on their payments (I say "large numbers" because it was clear that the toddler-room teachers were handing out envelopes to many of the parents), the obvious conclusion is that the person you just fired had poor organizational skills. Perhaps you knew that and that's why, or part of why, you fired her. But by logical extension, there are two possible explanations: One, that all those people really did not pay their bills and were getting away with it because Dana was too disorganized to go after them; or two, that they really DID pay and Dana was too disorganized to keep proper records of said payments. From my perspective, it seems, both of those explanations are equally likely. The latter has a bit of an edge in terms of likelihood, because presumably the head office does keep records and would notice if this center were bringing in significantly lower amounts of cash than its enrollment numbers indicated.

Still, let's presume that each of the two explanations has a 50-50 chance of being the correct one. You now have a choice of how to handle this. You could proceed from the assumption that scenario two is the correct one, giving your customers the benefit of the doubt, and send out a friendly letter saying "We're reviewing our records and want to make sure your account is up-to-date, so could you please come in and talk to us as soon as possible?" This way you can very quickly separate the good customers (the ones who will come in right away and show proof that they're paid up) from the deadbeats (the ones who come in and make excuses, or don't come at all), and you've done it in a friendly fashion, giving each customer the benefit of the doubt, not alienating anyone who is in good standing, not tarring anyone with the deadbeat brush until you have reason to believe they deserve it.

OR, you can assume that scenario one is the correct one -- that you have a center full of deadbeats -- and thus send them all threatening letters ordering them to pay up, with interest. This way you get everyone's attention...but in a very negative way. You're going to piss off a lot of good customers -- the ones who are fully paid up -- and as for the deadbeats, if there even are any, the distinction between the friendly letter and the threatening letter probably won't make much difference to them anyway. It's going to become pretty clear soon enough who the deadbeats are -- assuming that your new director is better organized -- so why not let them show themselves in due time?

Doesn't it seem like, when you're in the midst of a management transition, you should want to do everything within your power to reassure your customers that the transition is going to be smooth; to ensure their loyalty; to show your goodwill toward them? Aren't you already worried that the change in leadership is going to prompt some customers to jump ship? So why on EARTH would you shoot yourselves in the foot by sending out a letter that's going to further damage your public relations? Why risk alienating your entire customer base for no good reason?

Sure, the letter was undoubtedly a boilerplate, as I said, and Missy the new director undoubtedly had little or nothing to do with it. But like it or not, it's her problem now. I strongly feel that the head office should provide TWO boilerplates, for directors to use at their discretion: the mean threatening one, like the one I got, and another one with a gentler tone that would be more like "We're just trying to make sure our records are up to date and there appear to be some discrepancies, so please come and talk to us." One boilerplate for known (or strongly suspected) deadbeats, and one for situations when you're really not sure. Surely that wouldn't be too complicated to set up, and would give your directors a little more discretion to act based on their knowledge of the particular people involved...and would avoid needlessly pissing people the hell off. IDIOTS. ahem.

Okay, that got a bit long, but well...it occupied 90% of my brainpower the past couple of days because it was pissing me off so much. :P I'm calmer now, but still irritated. Mainly I'm just hoping this is not going to be a sign of things to come as far as what life is going to be like at the daycare now. sigh.

On the plus side, Ruthie is still doing great at daycare and today they posted a bunch of adorable pix that they took of the various toddlers doing various toddler-type activities. There were a couple cute shots of Ruthie eating snacks, playing, and listening to stories.

So anyway, that's what I've been up to the last couple days ;) Also I am now reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, which is extremely engaging and incredibly moving, thus far (almost halfway through). I have no clue where it's going to go....

Comments

[lovessong.livejournal.com]

Your daycare drama reminds me of an experience I had with my landlord, which I understand is not atypical. My building is owned by a big management company (another similarity to the daycare).

I had paid my rent on time (and always have), but was presented with a 5-day notice by the building manager. This wasn't a warning, but a legal notice telling me that if I didn't pay my rent in full within five days, they'd kick me out of the building. This was on a Thursday evening, so I was pretty alarmed to realize that five days later would be Tuesday.

I called the company immediately, wanting to resolve the issue, and got told the woman I needed to speak to wasn't in. I left her a message, but didn't hear back the next morning. When I called at about 11 am, I talked to the same person I'd spoken to the evening before, and she told me the person I needed was out until Monday (!) -- nice of them not to mention that the day before, when I explained the urgency of my situation. She didn't want to help me, even given the 5-day notice, but grudgingly did when I insisted.

And when she checked, lo and behold, they had my check. But then she refused to issue anything in writing that acknowledged the 5-day notice was in error, let alone an apology. I sent a formal complaint to the management company, and have never heard anything back from them.

Ugh. It makes me want to move out as soon as I can, let me tell you. I hope you get better resolution with the daycare than I have!

[mamajoan.livejournal.com]

Yeah, this shit really irritates me. And the thing is -- I'm guessing this is true in your situation as well as mine -- they don't really have much incentive to improve their customer service, because they know that if I jump ship, they'll be able to fill that slot again in like thirty seconds. Why should they apologize? Do they care if you get all huffy and move out (or if I get all huffy and take my kid out) -- hell no. I'm sure the demand for apartments in your area is as high as the demand for childcare in my area. So why should they bother trying to make us happy? I mean, aside from, like, common courtesy and good business practices and stupid stuff like that. ;P

[mofic.livejournal.com]

I don't really agree that there's no cost to them - in either case. In the day care case, even if they have a waiting list, there may well be time when the slot isn't filled, since the people on the waiting list have made other arrangements and need to switch them. And the person leaving may not pay for the last week or so - people leaving in anger often don't - and it's probably not worth the lawyer's fees to sue for that money. Plus changes in the classroom composition are disruptive and make both teachers and kids unhappy. At a time when they're switching directors they should be *especially* concerned with keeping status quo in staff and kids.

With an apartment, even if demand is high, it's generally empty for at least a little while, so it can be cleaned and painted and the apartment shown. And the new tenants have to have a credit check run on them and that costs money.

Btw, the same thign (mistakenly sending me a letter threatening eviction) happened to me when I was renting here in NYC. It got delivered by a process server in the night! I spent a sleepless night, I'll tell you. But I did think to call a colleague who was an attorney and he told me just what to do. Apparently, in NYC if they want to evict you they can't accept any rent from you. So he said to show up with a check the next morning and say "I think I'm paid up to date - that's what my records show. But as a gesture of good faith I'm giving you this check. Check your records and if you're right, this goes to my arrears and if I'm right it's next month's rent." I did that and they told me it was all a mistake as soon as I got there, but I made them take the check anyway.

[mamajoan.livejournal.com]

OK, I know you're right -- it's not that there is *no* cost to them. But it does seem like they're more lax about basic customer-service stuff in situations like this.

And as far as not paying the last week, this particular daycare requires a "deposit" of one week's tuition when you first sign up, sort of like a landlord requiring last month's rent when you move in. So you could see how that might be in some ways their justification for kicking you out so quickly -- if I miss Thursday's payment, such that the next week becomes my kid's final week, then I'm already paid up for that week and they don't lose any money.

[lovessong.livejournal.com]

Well, you know, there is high demand for apartments here. But at the same time, they pay tenants $500 for referring a friend who ends up moving in. You'd think that if they're willing to provide that sort of incentive, they'd also want to put their tenants in the position to be willing to recommend them to friends. And, in fact, I am in the position to do a lot of referring of management companies in my job, since I work with students who are often moving to the area for the first time.

So even from their perspective, it seems like a stupid practice, especially since they spend a lot of time in other ways trying to sell themselves as "helpful," "friendly," and "community-oriented." *rolls eyes*

[mofic.livejournal.com]

I'm glad it got straightened out and agree that the letter was out of line. Actually, I think it's a really bad letter even for normal lateness situations. There is always the possibility that a missed check is a mistake (and the mistake can be either the center's or the parent's) and threatening to kick someone out on the first attempt is really not the way to build good feeling with the parents using the day care! I think they should have a stepped approach, starting with a cheery "Did you forget to leave you check last week? Please stop by the office and let's go over the accounts" to a second notice saying "we must hear from you and clear this up" and only making threats on the third notice.

[rainbow-goddess.livejournal.com]

Maybe I've been watching too many TV crime shows or reading too many mystery novels, but my first suspicion wasn't that the previous manager was embezzling and that was both why the money was missing and why she disappeared so suddenly.

[mamajoan.livejournal.com]

I'll admit that crossed my mind too, but a) the checks were made out to the corporation, so I'm not sure she would have been able to cash them, and b) if the company knew she was embezzling (and fired her for it) then they wouldn't be threatening customers, because they would assume that any apparently-missing payments had been embezzled.

[rainbow-goddess.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I knew it was probably not the case, but I have a suspicious mind. :)

[ceo]

I'm convinced that daycare chains make a concerted effort to hire the most blitheringly incompetent nincompoops they can find for head-office management positions. Remind me to tell you sometime of the run-in I had with the benefits department at gosling's former employer, that very nearly resulted in a serious health situation for me due to lack of health insurance at a critical juncture.

[mamajoan.livejournal.com]

The more I hear about this kind of stuff, the more I realize how lucky I was in the first daycare I used (out in Acton) and how clueless I was about said luck. sigh.

[urban-cowboyz.livejournal.com]

You had commented on one of my altparent posts before.

I used to be Ruth's teacher...She's a fantastic kid. I do miss her and my other former students.

The day care (and corporation) is awful, hence why I (and many other teachers) all left around the same time. Dana was "let go", yes. You wouldn't believe the awful stuff that goes on, if you could get Ruth into another school, I would do that. For what you are paying (which I'm well aware if a hell of a lot) she deserves much higher quality care and to actually be taught something (I work for a non-profit school that uses the Reggio Emilia approach, you may find that sort of school much more to your liking and at least then you'd have the peace of mind in knowing that all of your hard earned money is going back into your childs classroom, school and teachers.).

And your assumption of the director was in fact correct and the assistant director is even worse.


I'm sorry you had that awful experience, I can't say that I'm surprised, but again I'm sorry.

[mamajoan.livejournal.com]

hey, sorry I managed to not reply to this sooner -- thanks for your perspective though. I think in some ways I just assume that this kind of stuff goes on behind the scenes everywhere and as long as my kid is getting decent care I don't worry about it...much. Anyway, right now the conveniences of the place still outweigh the bad stuff, but that could change any old time. ehhh.