Talk:Teleperformance

Archives (Index)

2013 2014 2016 2017 2020 2022 2023

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Corporate culture and awards

Hello again. I'd like to ask that the subheader "Corporate culture" be removed, as the content relates more to the main section called "Controversies".

I would also like to propose the inclusion of the following awards and recognitions:

• Stevie Award
• World Leader in its field by Gartner's Magic Quadrant in 2013
• Frost & Sullivan's Company of the Year 2023 for the Asia-Pacific industry

References

Thank you, ANishina (talk) 11:40, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Partly done Only the Stevie award is notable, so that's the only one that will be added. I need a better reason for why that subheading should be removed. It's already located under the Controversy section's level 2 heading — it's not as if the text and the level 3 heading were misplaced under a level 2 heading of a completely different subject. Please advise. When ready to proceed with the requested reasoning, kindly change the request template's answer parameter to read from yes to no. Regards,  Spintendo  13:20, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Spintendo, thank you.

Regarding the two other bullets in the above request (Magic Quadrant and Frost & Sullivan), perhaps that content would be better suited for the history section in chronological order as follows:

• In the third-to-last paragraph (highlighted in bold):

In 2010, Teleperformance acquired Scottish outsourcing call center 'beCogent' for £35 million. It ceased operations in December 2021 mainly due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and remote work. By 2013 Teleperformance had six contact centers in Tunisia. In 2013, Teleperformance acquired full control of TLS Contact., and was named World Leader in its field by Gartner's Magic Quadrant for the fourth time. In 2014, Teleperformance acquired Aegis USA Inc., a major outsourcing and technology company in the United States, the Philippines and Costa Rica. The transaction was approved by regulatory authorities. From 2014 to 2016, Teleperformance created and/or opened fifteen new centers worldwide. In January 2019, Teleperformance announced its second premises in Cairo. In March 2015 the company announced the opening of a new offshore facility in Paramaribo, Surinam. The multichannel contact center offers support to Benelux clients in Dutch.

• At the end of the History section:

In 2023, the company was named Frost & Sullivan's Company of the Year for the Asia-Pacific industry

Regarding the subheading "Corporate culture", it seems that the one sentence listed there is a summary of the entire "Controversies" section, listed just above. This is repetitive and doesn't seem to justify its own subsection. If you feel it's needed, perhaps it could just be placed at the beginning of the Controversies section to introduce the detailed information listed there.

References

Thanks again for your time, ANishina (talk) 08:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your suggestions, but as I stated earlier, those accolades are not independently notable. There is no "Company of the Year for the Asia-Pacific industry" Wikipedia page, nor is there a "Gartner's World Leader" article. Those companies may be notable, but whatever distinctions, honors or awards they come up with ought to have the prominence of their own Wikipedia pages for them to carry any WP:WEIGHT towards inclusion as content in articles. Regards,  Spintendo  09:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Spintendo, thanks for your feedback. As much of the information on Wikipedia isn't Wikilinked, I thought that perhaps if this wasn't phrased as awards but instead as events in the company's history, that might be appropriate since the relevant companies are notable. I understand if you disagree. Could you please take a look at the reason for removing the "Corporate culture" subheader, also mentioned above beneath the two bullets? Thanks again for your time, ANishina (talk) 11:55, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

perhaps it could just be placed at the beginning of the Controversies section to introduce the detailed information listed there Text found in the main bodies of articles are usually placed in chronological order. Whether or not moving the text as you've suggested changes that, I can't really tell. What I need is a verbatim proposal to look at here on the talk page that I can compare with how the article looks currently, in order to garner a sense if the changes are acceptable. Regards,  Spintendo  16:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Certainly, Spintendo. I would argue that the entire statement is not unencyclopedic and violates WP:NPOV, as the rest of the section already details the issues as reported by the sources. If you are uncomfortable removing it completely, my proposed change is highlighted below in yellow:

== Controversies ==

Teleperformance has been repeatedly criticized for privacy violations, surveillance, as well as extremely stressful working conditions for its workers. A group of labor unions filed a complaint documenting unsafe working conditions, monitoring, surveillance, union busting and retaliation against employees in ten countries in April 2020. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, workers in the Philippines, including those supporting Amazon's Ring camera contract, had nowhere to sleep but at their workspaces and were unable to meet social distancing requirements. The Financial Times was able to verify this with video and photos, including in a Cebu City office. After the working conditions were made public, the company promised to make improvements, but NBC News reported after six months the company was providing intermittent shuttle service, not properly sanitizing working spaces, and sending workers home without pay if they were quarantined.

While Amazon required support contractors to be onsite, Netflix's contract with Teleperformance allowed employees to work from home.

In Colombia, the union Utraclaro, part of the UNI Global Union, has organized Teleperformance employees, including moderators. In 2021, after the union submitted its demands for the company to protect freedom of association, Teleperformance filed a lawsuit against the union in a labor court. In November 2022, the Ministry of Labour launched an investigation into the company. After the investigation, shares in the company dropped by 34%. In April and May 2023, the company signed agreements allowing workers in Colombia, Romania and Poland to unionize. The company also stated, in its 2023 first-half results, that the Colombian government had closed its investigation with no findings against it.

Workers in Colombia, including those working on contracts for Amazon, Apple and Uber, are remotely monitored by the company, including by AI-enabled cameras and voice recording using its own TP Cloud Campus platform. The company stated 240,000 employees in 52 countries were using the platform by mid-2021. Workers in Albania, including those working on Apple content, were protected from webcam monitoring at home through their Data Protection Commission.

===Corporate culture===

Teleperformance has been repeatedly criticized for privacy violations, surveillance, as well as extremely stressful working conditions for its workers.

Thanks again, ANishina (talk) 18:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done @ANishina: I agree that having the information in two places is unnecessary, and it's somewhat unbalanced if that's all it says about the company's culture. I also removed the DW source, since I didn't see anything in the source that was used in the article. STEMinfo (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

References

Additional content request

Hello again. I am requesting that the following changes be made to the article:

• Modify the Stevie Award mentioned in the Awards section to include context and detail, using the current source #33. Suggested language:

Teleperformance Philippines’ digital recruitment technology won a Bronze Stevie Award at the 2020 Asia-Pacific Stevie Awards for the innovative use of technology in human resources. The technology is aimed at easing the job application process for Filipino people.

 Not done I'm not sold that the Stevie is notable, since the Stevie Awards article has only two reliable independent sources, and nothing more recent than 20 years ago. Regardless, the source you provided is syndicated content, barely better than a press release. It's very likely someone will remove the award at some point so I'm not going to expand the related award description you requested. STEMinfo (talk) 03:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

• Delete the list of client companies included in the last paragraph of the Controversies section. It is out of context; the source and the topic of the section do not have to do with specific companies- those companies should be removed or potentially included under general History instead.

Partly done A company employee serving Apple is specifically mentioned in the source as being part of the program, but the other two companies are not, so I removed them. STEMinfo (talk) 03:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

• Replace the word "criticized" used in the Teleperformance#Content_moderation section with "scrutinized" or "investigated" to align with The Forbes article provided as a source for this content.

 Not done I read the source and think "criticized" is appropriate. The Forbes report drew concerns about both companies from the bipartisan leaders of the powerful Senate Commerce consumer protection panel, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal and Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn, who demanded answers from Teleperformance and its client. You didn't use the {{edit COI}} template so nobody else will see this if they aren't watching the page. You can always try to repost and try to establish consensus STEMinfo (talk) 03:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ANishina (talk • contribs) 23:02, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I also reworded the statement sourced with a press release to indicate that the announcement was made using a press release. STEMinfo (talk) 03:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

STEMinfo thank you for looking into this. If you have a moment to look at my request and the subsequent discussion at Talk:Teleperformance#Corporate_culture_and_awards, I would appreciate your input there as well. I was previously engaged with Spintendo, but he hasn't responded in a while. Thanks again. ANishina (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm still here, but as it has been awhile since the discussion you've mentioned, if you could briefly re-iterate what changes you'd like to be made, that would be most helpful. Thank you! Regards,  Spintendo  01:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Removing Vandalism

Gnkgr Nice try, but using three self-published Russian-language "sources" in no way, shape or form meets WP:N. Using these self-published blog posts (which literally have "our" in the title... real credible) to cover non-notable events is blatant promotionalism. A simple Google search reveals there isn't a single bit of credible news coverage about the notability of these "sectoral unions" and their actions.

There's nothing notable about this 'organization' or event, so take the promotional activism to a different platform, or come back with citations that actually meet the guidelines. I am removing the vandalism in question again. Coconutshrimp (talk) 03:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, you can look over at Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) and voice potential disagreements about sectoral unions not being credible. I don't believe this remark is relevant to this page. Gnkgr (talk) 09:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

There is nothing about 'sectoral unions' on the page you're referencing, and whether they are sources from Greece and not Russia, they are still poor citations. They are clearly small publishers with little to no peer review. The platforms themselves look like personal blogs. See their UI and reputation. They do not meet WP:RS, and the guidelines you referenced in your edit summary earlier were completely irrelevant to the edit itself. Your edit is malicious vandalism and not based on Wikipedia's most basic rule of reliable sourcing. You should continue the discussion here rather than edit warring until a consensus is reached. Coconutshrimp (talk) 15:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Please don't assume one's nationality based on stereotypes as that's textbook racism.

The notability guidelines cover sectoral unions because they cover an entire country as unions. I implore you to read the guideline, especially the section under Non-commercial organizations. Further, the edits at question have been supported by nationally published newspapers Efimerida ton Syntakton and the international World Federation of Trade Unions and international media which are notable and reliable.

Also, please refer to WP:RSUEQ as to why and how non-english sources are allowed and encouraged in English wikipedia. Gnkgr (talk) 15:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

We are edit warring at this point. Clearly you don't understand the Reliable Sourcing guidelines on Wikipedia if you're trying to pass these sources for this questionable content. The 'racism' callouts are aggressive and uncalled for as well. This leads me to believe your opinions on this platform are even less credible. You keep referencing Wikipedia:RSUEQ, but that ruleset is specifically for quotes, not citations! It is just giving rules on translating text for quotes, it is not saying anything about verifiable foreign sources (which are credible in some cases, but not in this one). In fact, see the ruleset above the one you keep referencing, Wikipedia:RSUEC. Per that ruleset, I'd like you to provide a translation of the articles that specifically correlate with the edit you made. Even if the content in the articles matches up with the edit you keep making, I fail to see how these sources are seen as credible. These citations not being in English doesn't make them any more credible than personal blogs written in English. You're hiding behind the guise of foreign sources and racism accusations and it is concerning. Coconutshrimp (talk) 13:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Since 3 reliable English language sources were provided your concerns should be covered by now. Gnkgr (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

It is clear you have some sort of vendetta against this company with your recent edits. They all have an extremely negative connotation, and the sourcing has been lackluster. Please stop adding content without consulting the community here first. This is in an effort to avoid [[WP:WAR]]. Your most recent edit was particularly concerning with the use of a Press Release as a source and some heavy accusations. I've undone your most recent edits. Please consult future edits here and provide sourcing that the community can evaluate. Again, this is in an effort to avoid escalation in the future. Coconutshrimp (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I would kindly ask you to refrain from removing additions to the article that are well sourced. Please also declare your affiliations with Teleperformance and any potential affiliates. Gnkgr (talk) 21:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

You both need to read WP:VAND and stop describing each other's edits as vandalism. This is a content dispute. Have you considered requesting a 3rd opinion? --Onorem (talk) 22:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)