yes and no O lurking bear.
In the retail customer return case that I read about, customers were purchasing with no intent of permanent ownership (e.g. averaging over 300 returns of clothing articles per year). They were abusing customer friendly policies and in essence getting premium level services at normal prices. This in essence was forcing the bulk of the retailers customers to subsidize the abuser's wasteful shopping habits. However, the article I was reading about also included a story of a customer who returned only a small percentage of what they bought who got hit by a limit of returns that was a very bad thing for the retailer to do.
If a customer is assigned an instructor for a group lesson and the response from the customer is "No, I don't like that instructor, I will only accept instructor y or z", is this a problem that needs to be fixed?
I had an interesting experience with a well known pizza company. They were all a tizzy because some stores were getting customer complaints about the pizza sauce being too spicy. I tasted the suspect sauce. There was nothing "wrong" with it. But it was subtly spicier than the quote standard unquote sauce. If you have any knowledge of the difficulty of getting millions of gallons of pizza sauce to taste the same year after year when the tomatoes themselves have different tastes every year and taste different depending on where they come from, such complaints seem laughable. Nonetheless, that was the standard of the company and every complainer got free pizza and crap hit the fan until the problem was discovered and fixed.
Unfortunately, minimal acceptable quality of ski instruction is pretty hard to define. Most resorts will use a higher than average number of complaints (or injuries) to help identify which instructors are not delivering a quality lesson. But when you get a markedly higher than average number of complaints coming from a specific customer, looking at the source takes on a different meaning. Nonetheless, as a trainer and part time "Stupidvisor", my experience is that there is an attempt to evaluate and improve instructor quality outside of the complaint system through clinics and direct observation of lessons. If a complaint comes in about a pro on the "Watch" list, there will be less questioning about what the problem was.
The reaility is that some pros are better than others. Buying a group lesson does not entitle one to a guarantee of lesson quality equal to what the best instructor on staff would deliver. It's certainly possible that the least skilled pro on staff can deliver the minimally acceptable quality of lesson that the resort can guarantee. I would think most ski school directors believe that of their staff. Nonetheless, on any given day any given pro can make a mistake that would entitle a guest to ask for and receive a do over (I can think of 45 guests from one of my lessons who were kind enough not to do so). Given the "gray"ness of what is good or bad (e.g. depending on the students 10 people can be a good class size or 6 people can be too many), erring on the side of responding to customer complaints, but cutting off chronic complainers is not so bad as long as you make sure that the pro is not the real problem. But it's still a judgement call.