![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Aug. 28th, 2007 06:01 pmWas switching on my workstation at the start of the shift when the team leaders called over "Don't log on". The system was down, so we were all told to check our internal e-mails. I only had one, so when I'd read that I sat studying the survey instruction book until I returned from my first mini-break, when Marilyn told me to read over the Site Emergency Procedures. Was still reading them at 10.30 when Christine #3 walked round telling everyone to go down to the Map Room.
When we'd all moved into the front few rows in order to be able to hear Marilyn's voice, she explained that the supervisors had decided to fill the time by holding a symposium on Respondent Reluctance. She added that this was because the five days of Avoiding Refusal Training we were all supposed to have next month had been scrapped as they couldn't afford to take us off the phones for so long. The supervisors opened discussion on various scenarios involving reluctant respondents and invited contributions from the floor (I made a few), until after an hour many of the ladies had started to chatter among themselves so Christine diplomatically announced a comfort break.
Just before the break, Christine had answered one query by saying a respondent has to be at least 18 to answer for themselves. When we returned from the break and the initial chatter had died down, allowing Christine to resume the discussion, I asked if, in a two person household consisting of a married couple, one of whom is 16 or 17, the older partner has to answer for both. A woman sitting a couple of seats away from me moaned about a "technical point". Christine said no, a married person is considered an adult and can answer for themselves. The woman who'd moaned leaned over to me and said "I'm going to beat you up outside."
Just before 12 noon word came from upstairs that we could resume interviewing, so it was back to the telephone unit. I was kept busy interviewing till 1.15, but then, after returning from my last mini-break, only did one more person, and got away on time. On my way out, Marilyn thanked me for my contributions to the discussion.
Got to go to the pub for the footie.
When we'd all moved into the front few rows in order to be able to hear Marilyn's voice, she explained that the supervisors had decided to fill the time by holding a symposium on Respondent Reluctance. She added that this was because the five days of Avoiding Refusal Training we were all supposed to have next month had been scrapped as they couldn't afford to take us off the phones for so long. The supervisors opened discussion on various scenarios involving reluctant respondents and invited contributions from the floor (I made a few), until after an hour many of the ladies had started to chatter among themselves so Christine diplomatically announced a comfort break.
Just before the break, Christine had answered one query by saying a respondent has to be at least 18 to answer for themselves. When we returned from the break and the initial chatter had died down, allowing Christine to resume the discussion, I asked if, in a two person household consisting of a married couple, one of whom is 16 or 17, the older partner has to answer for both. A woman sitting a couple of seats away from me moaned about a "technical point". Christine said no, a married person is considered an adult and can answer for themselves. The woman who'd moaned leaned over to me and said "I'm going to beat you up outside."
Just before 12 noon word came from upstairs that we could resume interviewing, so it was back to the telephone unit. I was kept busy interviewing till 1.15, but then, after returning from my last mini-break, only did one more person, and got away on time. On my way out, Marilyn thanked me for my contributions to the discussion.
Got to go to the pub for the footie.
