craptastic treatment | life and puppies

Archive for the 'craptastic treatment' Category

Where we spend our money or why I will never buy anything from Menards

Published July 22, 2012 bling blog , craptastic treatment , local 7 Comments

I make choices every day in the ways in which I choose to spend our money. We all do. I also frequently make compromises when I make those choices. I think most of us do. For example, I was at Ace on Saturday, looking at shower heads for our new (!!!!) shower. I picked up the one I wanted, which is the same one we had installed in our upstairs shower, and looked at where it had been made. China. I picked up another brand and guess what? China. And the third one? China. I had exhausted all of the brands and left the store after purchasing the one I had initially wanted. I didn’t feel great about it, but I left the store unconvinced that I could find a shower head that was made stateside. I was bummed.

On the other hand, Aaron & Bear & I were recently at Costco and trying to find puppy treats that weren’t made in China. This search was prompted by some news about unsafe Chinese dog treats, as well as Gracie getting sick not too long after ingesting some previously purchased Costco treats made across the Pacific (whether it was related to the origin of the treats is unknown). After seeing “Made in China” a couple of times, we found some made in the old U.S. of A. and smiled broadly. Hooray! It was a small victory, of course, but we relished it. And so did puppy.

On yet another hand, I buy a million things all the time without even looking at where they are made. I’m not proud of this, but I admit it. I try hard to make more informed choices. I try to buy local, but I admit to frequent trips to Target and tons of internet shopping. I love to patronize local eateries, but I also adore a McDonald’s diet Coke more often than not.

In any event, one place that I hope that I can always say – unless their practices change drastically – I have never purchased anything from is Wisconsin’s own, Menards. It makes me sad that it’s a Wisconsin-owned company that tops my list for ‘most abhorrent business,’ but so be it. I’m sure there are other companies that are as bad as Menards (which makes me sad to say), but because it’s a *local* company, I pay closer attention to its wrongdoings.

For me, it all started when I started seeing Ben. I wasn’t really aware of Menards before becoming close to Ben. I mean, I knew it existed, but I never thought much about it. Ben used to say we could never spend our money there — something to do with dumping in the Eau Claire River. That was pretty much good enough for me. I was, after all, only 22 years old. That prohibition stayed with me a long time, though. Probably, at least in part, because it was never a great sacrifice to boycott Menards.

Time marched on, as it does, and then came this. Of course the lawsuit and the illegal, immoral and abhorrent behavior leading up to this came well before the supreme court’s decision, but the decision highlighted for the country the indefensible behavior of the Menard company.

A couple of weeks ago, I was talking to our contractor about what we wanted done in the basement to make it something we can live with for the next few years. He had previously spoken the taboo word ‘Menards’ to me, but I had been able to ignore it. This time, after telling me the best selection for a certain item was at Menards, I told him, somewhat sheepishly, that I could not shop at Menards. He said, “Yeah, well, John Menard is a pri–” and cut himself off. I stepped in. “He’s an ass%^&$#,” I said. The contractor then rattled off to me how much Menard is delinquent in his state taxes. He made it more than clear that he is not a fan.

For whatever reason, I was thinking about all of this today. And so I did a little Google search while Bear was napping and I came across this. In case I wasn’t clear, I’ll never shop at Menards. I guess I hope you won’t, either.

Law school: the schools

Published January 11, 2011 craptastic treatment , law stuff 4 Comments

This is part one in a two-part series on my thoughts on this article from this Sunday’s NYT.

Is law school a racket? One of the first jokes (I use that term loosely) students learn in law school is that the answer to every question is, “It depends.” The answer to the question posed here is no different: it really does depend. It depends on which law school you go to, how you finance it and what your end goal is.

I have long had issue with the US News & World Report’s rankings system and long suspected that there was little accountability and lots of number tweaking. The article, though, gave me specific targets at which to aim my criticism: the schools themselves and the ABA. (US News & World Report comes off — to me — as a weak lemming in the mix; reporting just what the ABA and the schools tell it to.)

I did not know that the ABA is setting the “standards” by which the schools measure themselves. I suspect, of course, that the ABA is easily influenced by schools and their alum so, again, I focus my anger on the schools.

The schools have gotten away for YEARS with charging outrageous sums of money with promises of a rosy financial future. We all knew that was happening. What I did not know, though, is that one of the rankings by which US News judges the law schools is by looking at the employment figures for the school’s grads nine months after graduation. Sounds reasonable, right? Well, yes, but it does not mean that those grads have to be employed in anything related to the law. They could be waiting tables, cleaning toilets or walking dogs for a living. If they have a job, they count as a success! What’s more is that if the school cannot locate its recent graduates — say, even 25% of them, which Thomas Jefferson School of Law apparently has lost — they count as employed to! So, wowsers. Incentive not to keep in touch with your grads? I think so.

Another thing that I did not know, but suspected, is just how much the schools are overcharging. Running a law school has a pretty high personnel-level cost to it, but it doesn’t have labs to run or super equipment to buy. The article states that some law schools are so profitable that tuition money from them can be used to support other, less-flush areas of a university. I actually don’t mind that idea and, in fact, I may even like it. I like the idea of a law school, like Wisconsin, that is an important part of the university as a whole. Law students can reap great benefits from having a fully-funded, thriving university outside its front doors. Some law students get a dual degree in business or environmental science or history. I took a Spanish class my third year. But what about stand-alone law schools that pop up in strip malls in California? Why does it cost $38,700 for one year of law school at Thomas Jefferson? Or more than $40,000 at California Western School of Law? (Both in San Diego). Because they can get it, I guess. There is certainly no shortage of lenders.

So, the schools charge way too much money and lie about the job prospects. That’s pretty bad, right? What’s worse, I think, may be how self-righteous they are about it.

Beth Kransberger, identified as an associate dean of student affairs at Thomas Jefferson, is quoted as having said something that nearly had me throwing the paper across the room in disgust. She first states that most students at Thomas Jefferson are either (1) the first in their family to get a law degree or (2) immigrants and, according to her, both groups are generally from modest means. Um, hmm. So, a dad who is a doctor + a mom who is an engineer = modest means? Immigrant = poor? Anyway, moving on. Whether or not someone is from modest means has absolutely nothing to do with whether they should be accepted to an outrageously priced, craptastic law school. Actually, maybe it does — maybe it means they should be automatically rejected because the school comes to its ethical senses, realizing that it deliberately preys upon the poor person who thinks a law degree from Thomas Jefferson is something worth paying for.

The idea that law schools are getting away with bilking students of vast sums of money by promising them a secure future in a very insecure world makes me want to scream. What Ms. Kransberger, or any other law school administrator or professor, should be saying is this: If you, potential law student, want to get a legal education you should be aware of the following: (a) law school is expensive; (b) there is no guarantee that you will get a legal job — or any job — upon graduation; (c) the market is saturated with lawyers; (d) where your degree is from matters; (e) doing well in school matters; and (f) lenders expect to be paid back. With interest. Potential student, you should also know this: (a) a legal education can be a really great, exciting thing; (b) law school is at once academically vigorous and incredibly tedious; (c) being a lawyer is at once intellectually stimulating and painfully detail-oriented; (d) the law is the fundamental basis for a responsible civic community and, thus, as a lawyer, you will be a part of something very important; (e) you will, as a lawyer, often feel that you make no difference whatsoever and (f) every once in a while, you will feel very satisfied and proud.

Even if schools continue to charge crazy amounts for tuition (and I don’t see this changing anytime soon — it seems that academia always does well in a bad economy), I hope that they can at least be more honest with their consumers. And if they cannot, they I hope the consumers will do their due diligence, wise-up and make more educated decisions.

Next post: the students!

[Full disclosure: Ms. Kransberger held a similar position to the one she holds now at the UW Law School when I was a student there. In fact, at the beginning of my third year, I learned that the school would not be renewing the very small scholarship (about $500) that they had awarded me my first two years. My friend, Jess, learned the same thing about hers. Jess set up a meeting with Ms. Kransberger to discuss the situation, but Jess was quickly dismissed when Ms. Kransberger told her the decision was final, citing the school’s “obligation to its first year students.” I believe I emailed Ms. Kransberger to complain about these decisions but never got a response. To me, Ms. Kransberger seemed to be saying that her philosophy is to rope students in with inducements that they later take away when the students become so entrenched they have virtually no choice but to complete the degree. Not that I would have gone to law school, or dropped out of law school, over $500, but the attitude was what struck me then — and strikes me now in the article — as almost unethical.]

It gets better

Published October 7, 2010 bling blog , craptastic treatment 5 Comments

That’s the phrase circulating around facebook, television and other media outlets right now. It’s a nice, calming slogan attempting to abate what feels like a crisis. The recent suicides of Hope Witsell, Asher Brown, Phoebe Prince, Raymond Chase, Seth Walsh and Tyler Clementi, all teenagers, have us reeling. Bullying, and specifically cyberbulling, are all over the news right now. You can’t turn on a news program or go online to a news site without seeing at least one story about this horrible problem.

But it’s not new. Of course, the cyber aspect is relatively new, and there are probably more ways to bully now than ever before, but bullying has been around forever. And ever. And ever.

I was bullied in middle school. I wasn’t bullied for being gay or for being sexually active. All the same, though, I was bullied for being what, ultimately, all kids are bullied for: for being me. Girls that had been my friends decided — at some secret recess meeting, I’d always imagined — that I was not good enough to hang out with them anymore and that I should be shunned. Of course, no one told me this directly, but their indirect manner of communication could not have been more clear or hurtful.

I remember, one incident in particular: it was seventh grade and I had approached our science teacher, who was also in charge of the bowling team, to sign up for the bowling team that I had been on the year before with friends I’d known for years. She looked at me with sympathy bordering on — and maybe it was — pity. She told me my former teammates had already formed the team without me and there was no more room on it. I’m pretty sure I was about to walk away from her without dropping a tear, but I know the tears were just moments from letting loose. I think the only thing that stopped the flood was my shock. It was really happening. I couldn’t pretend anymore. My friends had left me. And they hadn’t even left a note.

These former friends TP-d my house several times, keyed my parents’ car, left nasty notes for me and generally made me feel scared, confused and completely alone. I wasn’t sure what I had done. I didn’t know what had changed. I didn’t know how to fix it. I didn’t know that it would ever be fixed.

I made new friends, but the sting still stung. And I felt insecure in a way that I had never felt before. I felt like the ground had given out beneath me and that I would never be on stable soil with sure-footing again. My parents discussed sending me to a different school. My teachers looked at me with sympathy and tried to tell me things like, “Buck up.” I made vain efforts to connect with my old chums, but I was rebuffed and excluded. Seventh and eighth grades were the two worst years of my life.

I felt so alone and so scared. It felt like things would never change, that I would always be outcast and never feel safe. Even my new friends felt temporary, like they were just sheltering me for a short time. I ate alone at lunch and I stopped participating in class. I remember with such particularity the shift in me with regard to participation. In our eighth grade French class, we were already asked to speak only in French. My first semester I really tried to do just that. I think I must have been one of the only ones who tried because I remember our teacher singling me out as a good example, “Class, essaye d’etre plus comme Kate, parle seulement en francais.” By second semester, though, my name was on the board week after week, indicating someone who was being reprimanded for lack of participation.

I remember mumbling answers in social studies, since I hadn’t yet stopped wanting to talk in class, and having other students hear me, raise their hands and repeat what I had said. And get acclaim, of course, for doing so. It was at this time that I also started twisting and, eventually, pulling out my hair.

And then high school came. And it got better. I made new friends and made amends with some of my old friends. And it got better. It was still hard sometimes, but the bullying stopped, the pranks stopped, the indirect cruelty just stopped. And it got better. I didn’t know what I had done. I didn’t know why things had changed. I knew only that, slowly, things had changed and things were better. Much better.

If I could talk to any kid that is suffering at the hands of other kids, I would tell her, “It really does get better. I promise.” I know these kids feel so awful and so scared and cannot see a better future, but it is out there. But if they can make it through the horrible storm of being a teenager, they will grow into an adult who is stronger than they ever thought was possible.

As much as this part of my childhood still has the power to make me sad, I am grateful for it. I think that it has made me a more empathetic, kinder person than I would have been otherwise. I think I am more sensitive and perceptive than I would have been without the pain. And I know that I am stronger for it.

I learned that worrying about what others think of me does me no good. Because that opinion can change with the wind. Whether I change or not, others’ perceptions of me may and I cannot control that. So I do not worry about them and, instead, worry about how I am living my life. Am I being kind? Am I giving? Am I strong? When I can answer yes to those questions is when I feel at peace. And no bullying or ridicule will change that.

Peachy

Published September 3, 2010 craptastic treatment 4 Comments
Tags: bad customer service, Hyatt, Hyatt Regency Milwaukee, newspapers

As some of you know by now, my awful Hyatt debacle has been cleared up. At least that’s what some high-up man at the Hyatt told me. To recap (and to totally repeat myself): We stayed at the Hyatt Regency Milwaukee August 20-22 and had paid for the room in advance. On August 31, I noticed that the Hyatt charged our credit card for $250, a charge that had been run on August 24 and had appeared on August 26. I called the hotel and was told the charge was for smoking. I protested my innocence and asked them to remove the charge. [Note: at this point, I really thought this was no big deal. Clearly they had made a mistake, they would take it off. Oops. My bad.] Nope.

My call was transferred to someone else. This time, I was speaking with the Fancy Director of Operations, Nancy. She was rude and unhelpful. She told me they had “evidence” against me. She said housekeeping was emailing her photographic evidence as we spoke! I continued to insist that this was impossible as there could be no evidence of something that never happened. In addition, I speculated that if the evidence were some sort of photograph of a cigarette butt, it would not show anything. I asked her if that were they type of evidence that she had, how did she know that that wasn’t from someone else’s room. She told me the Hyatt doesn’t make things up. I said that I don’t, either. When she supposedly received these smoking hot photos (ha!), she told me she was standing by her claim! I asked her to send me the photos, nope. I’d have to subpoena them, says Nancy.

Fuming (ha!), I draft a letter to the hotel, the corporate office, the FTC and DATCP. Letters sent. I also emailed the Wisconsin State Journal’s SOS page, WISC’s “On Your Side” program, as well as the general tip line at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. I called my credit card company to dispute the charge. I waited.

On Thursday, my boss suggested I call the corporate customer service number to get some bigger guns on the case. I did so, feeling really hopeful. And this is when I really broke down. They wouldn’t help. They didn’t care, they didn’t want to hear it, they didn’t want to talk. In fact, I got passed off to a “manager” and had only one option: leave a message on her voicemail. My message was long, tear-filled and pleading. I was really emotional at this point. I honestly couldn’t believe this was happening.

A couple of hours later, when my tears were dry, but my energy was at about zero, I got a call from a reporter at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. I was tired, but I immediately brightened up. He listened, he sympathized, he was completely incredulous. I had an ear! And the ear of someone who wasn’t my friend! The ear of the press! He asked me to email him a copy of my asthma prescriptions, which I willingly did. Someone was on my side!

A few hours after that I got a call from the Hyatt saying that they had just received my letter (asking for a refund/threatening a lawsuit if they didn’t refund me) and that of course they would take me at my word and refund my money! How silly it all was! I emailed the reporter to inform him of my good fortune (aka someone doing the right and reasonable thing) and he replied that he had left several voicemails and emails with the Hyatt since we’d spoken and that they had not been returned. He said they would probably still do the story.

I hope they do.

And, just a short note on the world of reality of televsion: it’s been a rough week. Tiffany out on Top Chef and Peach out on Project Runway. Yikes.

Here you go!

And here we go again…

Published August 31, 2010 craptastic treatment 11 Comments
Tags: Hyatt Regency Milwaukee

As I have said numerous times, sometimes life feels like a collection of efforts to ensure you are not walked all over. And so it is again today. I looked at my credit card statement and discovered we had incurred a $250.00 charge from the Hyatt Regency in Milwaukee where we stayed the weekend of August 20 to join my family for Irish Fest and other fun times. Assuming that the charge was a mistake — as I had prepaid for the room weeks earlier — I called the hotel to tell them so. Not so, says the Hyatt Regency. The hotel — and a particular woman named Nancy — insist that Aaron and I were smoking in the room and the $250.00 is a fine for that abhorrent behavior. Despite all of my pleadings and rantings that no such thing happened and that no such thing was even possible, Nancy told me she “stood by” her accusation and had the pictures to prove it! Now knowing that it was impossible that she had pictures that would show that we were smoking — since it never happened — I asked her if she would email me the pictures. She stated that she would not, but that I could subpoena them from her.

Here’s the thing. Neither Aaron nor I smoked in that room. It just didn’t happen. It. Did. Not. Happen. Could a cigarette butt somehow have found its way into the room on a shoe or something? I suppose that’s possible, but unlikely. And even if that’s what happened, there still was no smoking in the room so the $250.00 fine is absurd. Additionally, how do I know that these pictures — I can only guess that they are pictures of a cigarette — are of my room and were taken immediately upon me checking out? How does Nancy know that? The charges were placed on my card on August 24 — two days after we had left Milwaukee. Why did it take two days?

So angry. So angry. So angry.

So my letter writing campaign has begun again. Letters to the Hyatt Regency Milwaukee , the Hyatt Corp in Chicago, the Federal Trade Commission and the Wisconsin Department of Trade and Consumer Protection have been drafted and are about to be in the mail. I spent 30 minutes on the telephone with Capital One to start the dispute process. [I was told it would be difficult because I don’t have any evidence that I was not smoking. True, of course, but really?]

If this route doesn’t work, I guess I’ll be filing a complaint in Milwaukee County Circuit Court. Thankfully, I already have several lawyers on hand to assist me. And, me being one myself shouldn’t hurt.

So, here we go again. Whatever happens, I will never stay at the Hyatt Regency Milwaukee again and I hope you will not either. Absurd.

Addendum: This article is more than two years old but is spot-on. And infuriating since I pleaded my innocence and was met with hostility and because the hotel did not inform me of the charge in any way. I am SO ANGRY. I will never stay at a Hyatt again.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28

life and puppies