WIRELESS INDUSTRY CRAFTS BEST PRACTICES ON SERVICE QUALITY

CTIA-led work on voluntary best practices code predates Schumer legislation but grew out of perceived need in industry to better communicate with consumers on those issues, Berry said. “From a public policy point of view, it would be very helpful if we had some identified best practices so that we could answer almost all of these issues that are being asked at the state level,” he said. Side-by- side comparison of current business practices by wireless carriers closely resembles many of recommendations in Schumer’s wireless “bill of rights,” he said. Among other things, that measure would require data to be made publicly available so consumers could examine records for dropped calls, compare dead zones, examine signal strength. Referring to Schumer bill, Berry said: “The wireless industry has a fairly significant number of those recommendations in practice. We haven’t done a good job as an industry explaining that.” Best practices code will reflect what industry is doing now and “some of the things we could do better,” he said.

As example, Berry said effort was examining ways to improve explanation of coverage areas, which carriers’ might display in different ways to subscribers, by making it consistent across operators. “There should be a common way of displaying this information on maps,” he said. Similarly, power levels for handsets aren’t same for all wireless technologies so uniform definition could be used that would provide agreed-upon power level of what would constitute particular call completion rate, he said. Consumer information provided by carriers on coverage areas came up in FCC order last year that updated cellular service rules. Comr. Copps dissented from portion of order he said would repeal guarantees that certain cellular subscribers would be informed of their service coverage areas. In doing away with requirement that cellular carriers provide information about service area, FCC said such data already were provided at retail outlets and on Internet and that PCS and specialized mobile radio operators already furnished such information without regulatory mandate.

One challenge is to figure out how to provide common formats for providing such information for consumers among nationwide wireless carriers that compete with each other, Berry said. “Every one of these companies competes every day on the street level,” he said. But in areas such as privacy policy, each adheres to Sec. 222 enhanced privacy restrictions for location information in 1999 911 bill, he said. “No one in the states seems to know that,” he said. “Why can’t we all agree to the definition of how we say that.”

Schumer proposal would require all wireless bills to include box with standardized information on rates, including monthly base charge, per-min. charges for time not included in base plan, including roaming and night and weekend min. Termination and start-up fees, trial periods, taxes and surcharges would have to be disclosed. Aside from attention that issue has been getting at federal level, Cal. PUC has taken lead among state efforts in creating similar wireless “bill of rights,” which has sparked concern among carriers over potential burdens of new rules and costs associated with recordkeeping and other mandates.

Schumer bill had sparked immediate concern from CTIA last week as group balked at notion that competitive industry such as mobile wireless sector should be saddled with govt. regulations in that area. Increased regulation won’t fix issues such as coverage of dead zones, it said.