Wednesday, February 3, 1999
Students lose money over job offer
SCAM: Company claims to have open positions, then requests $495
fee
By Sarah Krupp
Daily Bruin Contributor
Almost every college student wants to earn more money, so when a
student is offered a high-paying job as a top executive, her or she
would have to be a fool to turn it down.
But such offers may be too good to be true.
Several students recruited on campus by Worldtech, a company
which provides low-price long-distance phone service, claim they
were falsely promised management positions matched with a lucrative
salary, while unknowingly being charged a $495 training fee.
But students were unaware of what positions they were actually
being offered, and claim they didn’t know the training fee was
non-refundable.
Joseph Wood, a Worldtech sales management executive, said the
contract specifically states there are no refunds. Worldtech, Wood
maintains, is a superb company which sells a "phenomenal
product."
"Because of our company, my grandma’s phone bill has been cut in
half," he said. "Now she has that much more money to spend on
things like groceries."
However, many of the students that were recruited said they felt
as though they had been misled.
"What they are doing is completely unfair. The prey on students
because they know we need money. As a company they may be
legitimate, but their tactics are unethical," said Gabriela
Marquez, a third-year political science and Spanish literature
student.
But Wood maintains that there is nothing unusual about the
manner in which the students were hired.
"I started the same way. That’s how our company works," Wood
said.
On the UCLA campus, Worldtech recruiters approached many
students. To initiate a conversation, they sometimes ask questions
like a difficult multiplication problem. Other students are told
that they are natural Worldtech employees.
"I was walking to class in a bunch of people and for some reason
I was singled out and before I said anything they told me, ‘You are
exactly the person we are looking for to work for our company,’"
said Litsa Georgantopoulis, a fourth-year english student who ended
up not accepting the offer.
Worldtech, according to Wood, began recruiting at UCLA to fill
entry-level management positions at a prospective Los Angeles
location.
When Marquez was approached on campus, she gave them her phone
number and received a call a few days later, asking her to come in
for an interview at their headquarters in Irvine.
"During the interview process they talked fast and made a lot of
implications. Most of all they talk money. ‘Low-tech, high-check’
is what they kept repeating," Marquez said.
The interviewer informed Marquez that "they saw in her the
potential to succeed in their company," and she was hired.
Next, according to Marquez, they asked her for a $495 training
fee. Uncertain, Marquez said she wavered but they assured her that
if she paid by credit card, she would earn the money to pay the
bill even before it had arrived.
When she left the office, Marquez and a group of other students
asked Worldtech trainees exactly what they did for the company. The
trainees informed the group they would be recruiting new employees.
Marquez said, until then she did not fully understand what the job
was she accepted.
"I was already suspicious, but when I found out I would have to
recruit others, I knew I didn’t want to do it," Marquez said.
She and others, including Richard Sui, a fourth-year physics
student, returned to inform Worldtech they no longer wanted to work
for their company.
However, Worldtech representatives refused to return Marquez’s
money, she said.
At this point, Sui was unaware he had even been charged a
training fee.
According to Sui, he was tricked into paying the fee under the
pretense that the interviewer was demonstrating how to sign up new
customers. Sui signed the contract just as a potential customer
would. When hired, he was asked for his credit card, driver’s
license and social security card for "security purposes."
Wood said that new employees are encouraged to read the
contract, and its ramifications are fully explained.
Steve Adelman, a lawyer representing a UCLA student who was
interviewed at the same time as Marquez, said that the contract is
ambiguous.
The contract contradicts itself, according to Adelman. For
example, in the first section of the agreement it states refunds
are permissible within 30 days, while the third section states the
fee is non-refundable.
"I suggest that if students were not provided with a copy of the
Policies and Procedures Manuals, Advertising Rules Regulations and
the Marketing and Compensation Plan or given the opportunity to
review said documents, they indicate their desire not to be bound
by said documents," said Adelman.
"(Students should) request a refund of all monies paid within 30
days of entering the agreement. If students feel they have been
wronged by Worldtech, they should sue in small claims courts," he
added. His client is demanding her money be returned.
Though the Irvine Police Department, where the company is based,
has received several complaints against the company, the company’s
conduct has not been proven illegal.
"We have looked at the information and at this point we don’t
see where they are committing anything criminal," said Phillip
Cadenhead, a detective for Irvine Police.
"Unfortunately, kids are handing out their money too quickly,
and we can’t do anything about it," he added.
Sui is working extra hours to compensate for the loss, with
little hope of receiving a refund.
"They told me your chance of getting a refund are slim and none,
and slim just walked out the door," Sui said.
He advises students to be weary of job opportunities that seem
perfect.
"If it sounds to be good to be true, that’s because it almost
always is," said Sui. "I learned that the hard way."
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]