Posted on 11/23/2015 12:59:45 PM PST by machogirl
To the best of my knowledge, the original story pointed out that this customer had their preferred card for quick access in addition to being a regular customer at that agency.
There is no question in my mind remaining that he was jacked around because he was Israeli.
The one who should be embarrassed is you.
Bet he has ties to international banking too. Or at least is a loan shark on the side. In favor of settlements. Uses blood in the matzah. Etc.
“How do you know who is innocent or guilty ? You have made alot of assumptions.”
It only takes a few sentences in the article to determine it.
1) The explicit company policy saying you may be required to provide a passport.
2) The husband saying he didn’t provide one initially (until later being denied rental for being rude) and the wife saying how unreasonable it is that they wouldn’t take the license alone.
“You are ignoring the fact that Dov had an AVIS loyalty card with years of no trouble and had in fact rented from the same location only two days prior.”
I directly addressed it several times, including I think in the post you are responding to.
If an agent doesn’t request the docs they are supposed to, it doesn’t change the fact that a different agent 2 days later needs to do their job correctly and request the docs they are supposed to.
I have a frequent car rental card, yet each time I have rented in a foreign country I have still had to present a passport.
I already have the passport details in my rental, my rental program profile, yet I still had to show my passport. Yet somehow I didn’t argue or throw a fit in the office and run to the press with wild accusations.
Look at the wife’s comment:
“Of course it was embarrassing. They wouldn’t even open our reservation and see that we have an Avis Wizard number or that we had rented a car from the same location two days before. There was no way they would rent a car with that license. There was no way to reason with them.”
What journalistic malpractice are you referring to ?
It in the article you are responding to, I think. Here’s what I wrote earlier:
“The author of the first article in observer could have done 20 seconds of research to discover the agent acted totally consistently with company policy in requesting a passport.
Instead the author left implications that the agent and office were refusing to accept the israeli drivers license alone out of pure bigotry and malice.
That’s breathtaking irresponsibility.
And what cost? An internet mob doing huge wreckage.”
“The man denied service alleged that the employees deviated from operational policy at that location when he presented his Israeli documents. Why are your instincts with the clerk ? “
Nothing to do with instincts, it’s simple logic.
The company policy on the company website proves his allegation was wrong.
“Are you denying antiIsrael discrimination exists ?”
Is that a dumb question? Yes, yes it is.
“Has something under the surface triggered a strong emotional response ? Is it because it concerns an Israeli ?”
I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that people happy to unfairly smear a company with wild accusations of bigotry do the same so quickly and easily to other freepers.
Perhaps it says more about the accuser than me.
Very nice story, esp about the taxi drivers. I went to Canada with my Grandma in ‘83. One of my cousins was along, she forgot her DL and didn’t have one to get back in. LOL Nice officer said “okay” when my Grandma said, “I am her Grandmother”. Back into the USA (different time). I haven’t been on a plane in 34 years. I think that those sensors they have detecting stress hormones (reportedly those sensors security has) would go off the minute I got in line to board the plane.
Been to Mexico, ONCE, in 1978. Tijuana with my grandparents.
Never again.
Machogirl, world traveler diary ;)
I agree about net/twitter mobs. I’m sick of social media, BUT I still agree to disagree with you about the word MAY. Not the same and hopefully now they will fix it in their docs on the website. Still wasn’t early this morning when I posted it. Of course we all learned with the Billary that “is” MAY not mean “is”. ;)
Amazing in this age of social media, good and bad abounds. Thanks for alerting me to another thread. I only thought there was the first two and then this one. Been here 15 years and I still can’t search properly. lol The quest for the Loyal Order of Freeperhood continues.
I notice you did not answer the question, and your earlier answer about antiIsrael bias grammatically denied it exists. Was that a grammatical oversight on your part or do you actually deny there is serious and prevalent antiIsrael bias, especially among Moslems ?
Your responses have generally been over the top. It is quite reasonable to ask for a credible answer as to why, which so far, it seems to me, you have not provided.
I'll raise another issue, the potential impact of sloppy business practices, which Avis admits to.
Clearly he should have been rented his car based on his rental history. Asking for a passport is reasonable, but should be done consistently. Not at the discretion of a counter clerk, unless it's a backup in cases of concern about the renters identity. In that context it's reasonable to inquire why the counter clerk refused his Israeli drivers license, not Avis policy and adequate id to rent the car.
Personally, I'd complain under the same circumstances, particularly given a track record of rentals with Avis. And probably use Hertz next time. In this case the renter had an additional reason to clarify the reason for his denial. He's the chief counsel for Teva Pharmaceuticals, a $20 billion plus Israeli company with 30 locations and over 7,000 employees in the US, over 40,000 worldwide. It's reasonable to assume that accounts for a rental or two by their 7,000 Israeli employees. Were I in his shoes I'd feel an obligation to give a heads up to whomever manages the companies travel relationships. In his case it ruined a social evening, however it's a potential expense to the company if employees run into similar problems with Israeli licenses. Of licenses from other countries. Avis is not the only rental company.
I think you’ve made it abundantly clearly to every fair minded reader here that your line of questioning is in bad faith.
It’s pretty clear to me there were some exaggerated claims of discimination by the exec. If anything he had prior discimination in his favor and expected it again.
If you could but read your own comments as a fairminded reader I think you would change your tone. It seems to me your emotionally charged responses are not armed with facts, but rather supposition, conjecture, and assumptions.
yep, I agree.
You built a sand castle on the assumption that may meant shall, which is patently false. Avis has apologized to their loyal customer because his perception of events was rational and their policy was inconsistent. The initial handling of the event by Avis was flawed.
After reading the company name, added that to my search list and found a few openings here in AZ. Unfortunately I don’t qualify, but ya never know.
Avis hasn’t fired the black racists, so not good enough.
The proper documentation was provided. Avis refused to rent anyway. Period.
Hey, the official company policy says I may be required to show a passport in addition to my country driver’s license.
This agent is asking for a passport when one two days ago didn’t.
It must be because of bigotry! I will run to the press!
Nope, my argument doesn’t depend on may being the same as shall. If anything the word “may” just proves further that the company didn’t do anything wrong.
It is fair warning that you may be asked for a passport one time and not another.
The only thing the company “apologized” for is showing how asking for it one time and not another could cause customer confusion.
I might be confused too, question it, then check the company policy and see oh yeah that request is legit —
instead of running to the press like a maniac making wild unfair claims of discrimination and bigotry.
Arbitrary discrimination based on race, national origin, etc. is forbidden. The customer was loyal, long standing, and had a reasonable expectation of friendly service from that branch. He did not get it. Whether Shamoura is a black Moslem, and if so, has an emotional bias against Israel and Israelis, remains unproven. It is not, defacto, irrational, for Dov to reason her behavior was antiIsraeli bias.
It must be because of bigotry! I will run to the press!
I still cannot fathom the source of your responses. They seem focused, like a bull's eye on these Israelis.
Nope, my argument doesn’t depend on may being the same as shall. If anything the word “may†just proves further that the company didn’t do anything wrong.
Yes, your argument absolutely depends on may meaning shall as you have assumed the Avis employees who previously rented to a long standing loyal customer but these two under the microscope, as it were, did nothing wrong and provided excellent customer service.
It is fair warning that you may be asked for a passport one time and not another.
There must be a consistent and credible reason. You cannot discriminate against someone in this country because he is Israeli.
The only thing the company “apologized†for is showing how asking for it one time and not another could cause customer confusion.
That is the company's fault, including the two reps who profess to outstanding customer service.
I might be confused too, question it, then check the company policy and see oh yeah that request is legit —
instead of running to the press like a maniac making wild unfair claims of discrimination and bigotry.
And yet here you are, posting like a maniac making wild unfair claims of discrimination and bigotry. You have availed yourself of an informal press, as it were.
I suppose either way something will dribble out. Since I wasn’t there, I have no idea what exactly was said. Even if the manager thought the guy had an attitude and was trying to stir up trouble, once he talked to customer service, I’d have made nice, rented the car, and trouble over.
Maybe my eyes glazed are too glazed over, but the few articles on other “news” sites that I found speaking about this all use the original source (observer). Would be interesting to hear from the reporter that wrote the story. or not.
Avis policy/non-policy/inconsistency caused the primary issue. I hope they have really, minimum, fixed their policy with words that don’t mean what they say they are meant to mean. Fixing their own policy can’t be that hard. Change “may” to “shall”, print some big signs to post in every office, memo short and sweet to all employees.
What changes or not that will do to their “wizard” program?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.