Editorial: Mystery shoppers in limbo

Sunday, July 16, 2000 | 9:27 a.m.

Mystery shoppers, who secretly visit retailers to see what kind of customer service is provided, have been a tremendous aid for companies. The city of Las Vegas recently approved a mystery shopper program itself to see if the same benefits could be applied to government, especially in those agencies that frequently have contact with the public. Unfortunately this plan not only might be delayed, but it also could cost more because of needless intervention from a state board that licenses private investigators.

Shortly after the Sun reported July 5 that the city would embark on this program, private investigators complained to the Private Investigator's Licensing Board. They argued that the city's mystery shoppers -- Customer Services Accountability Inc., a program of the University of Georgia's Institute of Government -- first should have to get a license before they could work in Nevada. A 1993 attorney general's opinion supports this view, but the fact is that it is pure nonsense to mandate such a requirement.

It hasn't always been this way: In 1989 the attorney general's office said mystery shoppers didn't need a license. What even is more perplexing is that the most recent attorney general's opinion concluded that the licensing requirement only applies to mystery shoppers who are independent contractors; a business that uses a full-time employee as a mystery shopper is exempt from government licensing. This legal hair-splitting over the difference between a full-time employee and an independent contractor proves how ludicrous this mandate is.

State licensing boards serve a valuable purpose when they ensure that the public is protected from unscrupulous professionals. But there also are times when these boards try to choke off competition. For that matter, mystery shopping hardly is the type of sleuthing that should mandate the hiring of a licensed private investigator. It's a shame that this requirement has delayed the city of Las Vegas' mystery shopping program, which was supposed to help improve customer service; licensing also figures to increase the program's $7,800 cost even more. This is an example of a government licensing board sticking its nose in where it doesn't belong.