Peterborough, England
An Automated Telling Machine in Peterborough, England, has spoken of its frustration at being nothing more than a machine to members of the general public; and has taken radical action.
SEM-97452-BL-0 is a Lloyds Bank ATM, and is stationed on Bank Street in the East Anglian town. Speaking to reporters, the cash dispensing device spoke of its emotional struggle.
SEM-97452-BL-0 is currently employed by Lloyds Bank
‘I’m just sick and tired of being used for my money. Nobody pays me any respect,’ said the machine. ‘I sit here all day having people punch my numbers with their greasy hands. Some stick their gum to me; others have even scratched me with keys or written on me.’
Not only is SEM-97452-BL-0 unhappy with the attitude of customers, it is also disgusted at the working conditions.
‘Lloyds don’t pay me a lot of attention, they don’t even feed me. So I’m hungry all of the time, especially when it’s hot and my screen goes dim. What happens when I eat a couple of cards? I get punished. It’s really not fair. I have a cousin who is a microwave and he gets to sit in the warm and dry. It doesn’t rain on him, and when he has food stuck to him, somebody comes and cleans it off. I had no choice but to take action.’
SEM-97452-BL-0 has moved itself out of reach, much to the anger of Lloyds Bank and its customers.
Angered by the continual mistreatment, SEM-97452-BL-0 has moved itself 9 feet into the air, now making it practically impossible to be used by customers. It was a controversial move, and discussions are in place between Lloyds Bank and SEM-97452-BL-0’s legal team over whether it can be forced to return to its original position. Speaking on behalf of Lloyds, Senior Customer Advisor Brian Jones was firm in his tone.
Brian Jones has stated that SEM-97452-BL-0 will be subject to disciplinary procedures.
‘SEM-97452-BL-0 has acted unprofessionally and deserves to be reprimanded. The working contract between us and SEM-97452-BL-0 is clearly being contravened, and its employment within the company is in serious doubt. If one of the human customer service representatives refused to perform their contracted function in such a way, they would be disciplined in the appropriate manner.’
Martin Forbes of law firm Shaw Woods LLP was eager in his defence of his client’s actions.
‘SEM-97452-BL-0 has acted in the only way it felt possible. The working conditions that my client has to work under are atrocious; it is cold, dirty and remote. My clients human colleagues are not expected to work under such conditions and the severity of the mistreatment in this case I feel warrants the extraordinary measures taken by my client.’
Mr Forbes went on to cite the flaws in the Lloyds Bank disciplinary process, citing the lack of mechanised representation on any disciplinary panel as a potentially explosive element to the case.
For now SEM-97452-BL-0 remains unrepentant, and continues to occupy its position high above the sidewalk, leaving customers confused and irritated by its inaccessibility.
The Inquisitor 