I wonder...<p>This is a story of a <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/monopoly" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>monopoly</span></a>. It is also a story of <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/government" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>government</span></a> <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/licensing" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>licensing</span></a>, and <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/accessibility" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>accessibility</span></a>. There’s a bit of <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/MLM" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>MLM</span></a>, but not the usual kind.</p><p>I am seeking employment as an <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/administrative" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>administrative</span></a> <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/professional" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>professional</span></a> (<a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/administrativeAssistant" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>administrativeAssistant</span></a>, <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/executiveAssistant" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>executiveAssistant</span></a>, basically, <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/administrativeSupport" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>administrativeSupport</span></a>). I was on a <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/contract" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>contract</span></a> with a <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/BigTech" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>BigTech</span></a> company, and the program I was supporting is sundowning, so about two-thirds of us were let go at the end of the fiscal year.</p><p>I’ve been applying to many places, some of which turned out to be <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/scams" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>scams</span></a> (any company with the word “travel”, “adventure”, or “vacation” in their name, and who claims to be looking for administrative anything is a scam. Ten times out of ten).</p><p>I also managed to apply to an insurance … organization. They are agents selling policies from a specific <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/BigInsurance" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>BigInsurance</span></a>, only through “agencies” (and sub-agencies - they unfortunately invited prospects (including me) to join their "huddles" on Zoom and I'm observant) and they are looking for prospects in specific regions of the <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/USA" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>USA</span></a> and <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/Canada" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Canada</span></a>. </p><p>This costs money, as this is a profession where you need a <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/license" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>license</span></a>. The investment was reasonable, $49 for <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/training" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>training</span></a>, another $49 for the <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/test" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>test</span></a>, and another $50 for the license application, plus $45ish for <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/fingerprinting" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>fingerprinting</span></a>. Even if I choose not to work for the people who recruited me, credentials tend to be useful in some way. </p><p>I paid for the training on 04 Nov, paid for the test on 12 Nov (scheduled for 26 Nov), did the fingerprinting on 16 Nov. Also on 12 Nov, I tried to initiate the <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/accommodations" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>accommodations</span></a> process with the testing company, (the above-mentioned monopoly) Pearson VUE. </p><p>To apply for accommodations, the test-taker is asked to create an additional account on the accommodations portal. The final step of this process is to follow the steps in a “verification email” that may take up to fifteen minutes to be sent.</p><p>I /never/ received this email. Thus, I was never able to verify my account, or move forward in the process. After several telephone calls, I was provided an email address for the accessibility team.</p><p>On 21 Nov, I emailed the Pearson Accessibility team with a detailed, step-by-step, description of what I was doing, what I was seeing, and the fact that their system never provided me that verification email. Of course, since I’d already created the account, I was attempting to use the “Resend verification email” link (it runs a script). I included ten marked-up screenshots, and asked for a Read <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/Receipt" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Receipt</span></a>.</p><p>I actually got a reply. However, the reply was “you actually sent this to the wrong place.” It also stated that Pearson VUE did /not/ manage accommodations requests, that was done by the entity who owned the test.</p><p>I replied to that email, copy-pasted the email with the steps, attached the screenshots, and asked for another Read Receipt. In that email, I said, “This should be a simple process. I have invested hours of my time in documenting the behavior I am seeing because no one at Pearson VUE accepts my word that I'm following the procedure and it is not working. This will also cost me money to extend my access to training materials until I'm able to test.”</p><p>This got a reply where I was informed my account had been locked due to “too many attempts.” On 22 November, I was able to actually log into the portal and get the information I needed to request the appropriate document from my <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/VocRehab" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>VocRehab</span></a> counselor. I sent an email to both my counselor and her assistant, including the <a href="https://lgbtqia.space/tags/IDC" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>IDC</span></a> codes corresponding to my current situation (I’ve been an administrative pro long enough to know that the easier the request, the quicker it’s completed). </p><p>I received a request on 02 December to complete a DocuSign granting permission for my counselor to share the info with Pearson. Pearson’s website says the process can take “up to ten days,” so I scheduled my test for Friday, 20 Dec, figuring that would work.</p><p>On 13 Dec, Pearson notified my counselor that my request had been accepted, and the email included specific instructions for scheduling. The only option is to call a specific phone number. And they aren’t open on the weekend.</p><p>On Monday, 16 Dec, when I called, I was on hold “for the next available…” for 40 minutes. When I was finally able to speak to someone, they asked me to verify absolutely every bit of personal data they have on me. Then, I was told I would have to schedule the test at a Pearson Testing Center (there are several local ones). The first center, the one closest to me, did not have any openings until February. The next-closest had an availability for noon on January 17. I was put on hold while the agent tried to request that time. The call dropped.</p><p>Another 45 minutes waiting for an agent, and, again, I had to verify all the data. This time, after three “brief” holds of 5+ minutes, I was told the request was pending, and that I would receive a call. </p><p>I did receive a call on Thursday, 19 Dec, but my caller ID said it was from “State of California.” Which is /not/ Pearson, so I sent it to voicemail. The voicemail said I had to confirm that I wanted that time “within two business days” and I called back. After another long wait time, the agent said they needed to reach out to “that department” and after even more hold times, I was told that “Marcus” would call me back /that day/.</p><p>Of course he did not. I called back Friday morning, and, again, long hold times, and give the agent all the information. And “Marcus” wasn’t going to be in for twenty minutes (it was 9:40 CST, so, aha! he’s on PST). I called back at about 3:00 pm PST (5:00 pm my time). I used to support folks in all five time zones in the contiguous 48, so this is second nature). After another 45 minutes and stuff, the agent said that time was no longer available. </p><p>I followed all their steps and procedures. Apparently, the accommodations department at Pearson VUE is dependent on one person, Marcus. I should have been able to take this test by now. Nowhere on the website does it say that test takers requesting accommodations should NOT schedule online. I even deliberately scheduled to test at a local college because I /know/ they have the capability to provide the accommodations I need. </p><p>The really stupid part of this is all that time on hold and all that time documenting the misbehavior of their system. </p><p>I was promised a call on Monday, 23 Dec. Of course, I'm calling them.</p>