|
发表于 2021-12-8 09:53:08
|
显示全部楼层
Frank,
Your concern for the SP's is honourable however I think that is A. Not the responsibility of the client, and B. Protecting (or pretending to) the SP at the detriment to the client is wrong. Let me explain in more detail, bare with me ...
Firstly you wrote, "I don't think the EMT being asked by some agencies for the purpose of screening is meant to provide any additional advantage to the client." Absolutely not, if I gave that impression that was a mistake because that is not the case whatsoever.
Second, I care about SP's, even had relations on a personal level, met their family etc. and so I don't want to come across as a heartless soul however, I really need to pull on my big boy pants to talk about this honestly.
Let's get some facts and use some analogies along the way. First facts, SP's enjoy anonymity and immunity, no matter what happens they are victims and names, rights protected. Do some SP's get robbed - yes. Do some SP's get raped, yes. Do some SP's get killed, yes. Thankfully these are extremely rare occurrences, how do we know for sure, because there are many more Independent SP's than Agencies and if the risks outweighed the rewards there would be less Independents and more Agencies (assuming Agencies are always protecting SP's better).
Can a race car driver get in an accident, even more so than a SP get's raped, robbed, or killed? Very likely but, since there are a lot more SP encounters every day than car races in a year, the rates are not the same, the SP's at least publicly are far less. Some people might laugh at the analogy of a race driver in an accident, yet isn't it similar to an SP getting raped, but we continue on. We can agree that both need / deserve protection that's for sure and both need to make certain their fans / clients are safe too. Who is mostly responsible for the Driver? = Team, Team Owner, Association, Track, etc. Who is mostly responsible for the SP? = Themselves, Agents, LE to some extent.
Now in none of that is their an onus on the customers to be directly responsible? Putting in EMT into place though now involves the clients. Not only that, it puts clients in harms way. Like taking the wall on the track down so if the driver were to of hit it, now he won't get hurt, instead he would fly into a softer landing in the crowd.
Putting the clients at risk is unacceptable and has nothing to do with disparaging anyone or anything, simply put EMT is wrong. Laying it out to protect the SP is fall equivalency. If someone with or without EMT decides to do anything (on drugs, crazy, etc) then all EMT will do is provide a trail. The damage would have already occurred to the SP's person. So clearly it does not protect the SP very well at all. So what does it do? If there is an incident would the Agent report it to LE, likely not, the SP more likely to. So how does that play out? If money is taken the SP likely does not care or call LE, she gets her money x Agent, its the Agent issue. So at the end of the day and a stack of cash, if someone see's the SP and takes the money without harming the SP, who is responsible? That would be frightening thing to happen at the end of the day and all that money gone. The Agent would be pissed. I bet with EMT though there will be zero cases where at the end of the day, the SP has to cough over all the cash to someone she does not know at all, and never ever met, never seen before whatsoever, had no contact prior of any kind, none. Who would be so brazen to plan robbing the SP at the end of the day or before their pick-up has been made?
Say a physical issue arises and LE comes in to play, are they going to ask Agent for only the EMT info. of that one person only? Maybe the person before was involved too? And so if some crazy loon happen to go the same day as you, now you (client) are even more exposed.
Wrap up,,,,,,,, EMT =
- The SP is protected from, but only shielded as a deterrent from robbery, rape, death.
- The client has become completely exposed has no anonymity or control of the private information. Now introduces a new level of risk to their life being ruined, losing job, family, wife, children even friends, yes because guess who's name will be getting published.
- The Agent has protection for their cash, in the form of deterrent from thieves, including SP's that might be working with someone that comes at the end of the day. Ooopsssss, did I just say that?
Anyway, when we look at SPA's as we know they are at equal risk and how many use EMT? Certainly SPA would have as many or more cancellations so it's not about missed appointment compensation and besides who would put someone's lives at an increased risk over a missed appointment?
Are there other ways of providing as good or better security and protection other than EMT? Yes. Are we shaming Agent's that use EMT, no. Do we talk about it the same way we might if we do not receive a BBBJ / GFE from an SP, that's her choice of being safe, but yes we do talk about it. So we are not shaming, not even naming anyone here. If an Agent or SPA wants to use EMT it does not preclude nor prevent the discussion thereof.
|
|