> With Comcast you can usually just hang up and call again if you get an employee with an attitude.

I'm guessing that this tactic might actually make the nice employees look bad. The employees with an attitude will have better customer retention metrics; then the nice customer service reps risk losing their jobs or also developing an attitude.

It really depends on how intelligently companies run their retention metrics. Rather than measuring if a customer was retained for that phone call, it makes much more sense to measure which customers are retained after a month or so. Of course the first metric is easier to run; also large corporations "competing" in highly uncompetitive markets (internet, health insurance, etc.) have little incentive to provide any sort of reasonable, adequate customer service to begin with.

As a customer I don't care. I just want what I've called for. Comcast is the single worst customer service I've ever dealt with.

Even if that's true, Comcast's bad metrics aren't our responsibility.

The point is that this tactic would be selecting against the nice reps in the long run. Of course, I can't think of any other tactic that wouldn't do so.

Understood, but my point is that it is their responsibility to select for nice reps, not ours. If their metrics combined with the natural customer reaction selects for bad reps, that's their fault and their problem.

I called Comcast trying to sign up for their top-tier service when I was working from home. The guy on the other side kept asking me what on earth I'd need the top tier service for and kept asking me questions. Then he scheduled the visit for the tech on the wrong date. Every time I deal with Comcast, it's a hassle.

I can't believe I got interrogated when I signed up for service. Worst customer service ever.

Chances are they were getting better commission on a lower tier. Or some internal contest to see who can sign up more people on a certain plan.