A CRTC hearing took place last week, where a draft code of conduct to protect cell phone users was broken down, debated, and negotiated. Up for discussion were contract length, automatic renewals, notifications of overages, caps on fees, device unlocking, and much much more.
In case you missed it, I put out a bit of an update midway through the week, and I had also been live-tweeting the hearing from inside.
The CRTC, as you may know, had announced that they would develop the code back in October, after requests from big telecom companies (surprisingly enough), public interest groups, and, of course, citizens who had been speaking out about Canada's broken cell phone market. We at OpenMedia.ca started collecting Canadians' cell phone horror stories as soon as we could after that, to inform the Code and to ensure that the CRTC knows telecom price-gouging and limited choice have real human consequences. Those comments appeared in our submission to the proceeding, and were the basis of our oral comments at the hearing, which you can watch right here:
Now if you think a week of telecom hearings would be dull, you'd be dead wrong. There's a lot at stake, first of all, as Canada falls behind the rest of the industrialized world in many things digital. After years of being lobbied by big telecom and all but shutting citizens out, policymakers are just starting to take note of the problems Canadians are facing, and they're scrambling to take action.
When it comes to the cell phone market in particular--where three large players (Bell, Rogers, and Telus) rule--price-gouging and poor service are related mainly to a lack of choice. Knowing their customers have nowhere to turn, big telecom has been able to take big liberties with our communications interests, to the benefit of their bottom lines. But since Canadians started coming together as a community to fight for our digital rights, the tables have started to turn.
This relatively sudden change, however, has left industry lobbyists a little perplexed. They're used to getting what they want when they want it, with little push-back. They had grown accustomed to telling policymakers that Canadians are unqualified to participate--that we're not stakeholders in our own digital future--and getting away with it. Listening to them at the hearing this week made one thing clear: they still don't know how to speak to the public interest, and they resent it.
Bell, in particular, made that clear when they answered Commissioners' questions Thursday morning. They echoed the excuses put forward by Rogers, the only provider larger than them, which told the CRTC ad nauseum that the cell phone market is fine as is, that protections would be impractical for them, and that their customers wouldn't want them.
Long term contracts? According to Bell, Canadians love those. Caps on additional fees? Unnecessary and inconvenient. Contract clarity? Okay, but we'll decide what that means.
Bell, along with the other big telecom providers, also pushed for the Code of Conduct to supersede existing provincial rules. The proposal on the table now is that it exist alongside them, allowing cell phone users to benefit from whichever framework is stronger for their purposes. While only one national Code wouldn't be such a bad thing, we're in trouble if it actually weakens existing safeguards where they exist, and gives big telecom even more leeway to stifle choice and innovation.
Overall Bell's presentation made it clear that they're either out of touch with Canadians' needs, or ambivalent. While I completely understand that they have shareholders to please and a company to run, I'm always bowled over to see Big Telecom lobbyists so unwilling to come forward with helpful input that truly defines what does and does not make sense for their business and their customers, rather than simply pushing back on anything and everything that may introduce more choice or curb price-gouging. These lobbyists are people, aren't they? Can't they understand that this is about Canada's digital future?
Luckily (for my mental health), the hearing included more speakers than just big telecom. It was encouraging to hear the testimony of public interest lawyers and academics, who had done an incredible amount of work to demonstrate that Canada's wireless market simply isn't living up to citizens' reasonable expectations, and prescribe what needs to happen to remedy that. It was exciting listening to small, independent wireless providers like Mobilicity and Wind, which offered up realistic amendments to the draft Code that would give them more room to offer their services. The indie providers also reminded us that big telecom price-gouging isn't the only way of doing business in telecom.
The hearings may have ended on Friday, but the process is far from over. There are still submissions to file and conversations to be had. We at OpenMedia.ca, of course, want to continue hearing from you about this issue, as there's much work ahead. If you haven't already, visit http://CellPhoneHorrorStory.ca to show your support for a fairer cell phone market, and to share your experience.
Follow Lindsey Pinto on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Lindsey_Pinto
I'm glad to see all the coverage this is getting, but I'm pretty sad that no media outlet has done ANYTHING in the way of actually providing education about the operations of the teleco industry, the comparison of the teleco industry to other industries in terms of contract negotiations, nor have we addressed the cost of phones.
As consumers we do have a lot of choices, but that comes with a lot of work, my jobs over the last 6 years have had me all over Canada and into the US, I have no landline and at times carriers all of thebig3
Canadians don't want to admit it but we are small potatoes, all this fighting is going to do is make it cheaper for Toronto people to have cellphones, but rural Canadians are going to get hosed.
I've not seen a single report from a news outlet that has looked at the costs of hardware to the carriers.
Why are we not seeing what it costs the carrier to buy and sell an iPhone, a Samsung Galaxy 3, and a BlackBerry? those are what people want to have, what are the carriers paying? and how much are they selling us them for?
What is the Canadian Carriers Profit per user compared to a US carrier? to a UK Carrier?to an Indian Carrier?
Show us those numbers! Anyone who is actually FOR the people would be doing real research and not just spread hyperbole.
But I use mobile phones every day.
I've looked at T-Mobile and verizon plans for my secondary cellphone needs as I travel a good amount, the problem lies in that I can't have a Canadian number on them AND the pricing hasn't been as attractive in the last 2 years especially with the introduction of teired pricing plans in the US.
The best Canada Wide Plan for me has been with Rogers,
The best Ontario specific plan has been with Bell.
IF! I lived in the GTA and didn't travel Wind, has pretty attractive pricing.
For both cell phones & Internet, many people pay specifically for a set amount of bandwidth & cell minutes each month. Yet if their not used by the end of the month, they simply disappear.
Where do the unused cell minutes & bandwidth go?
Nowhere, since they were not used your provider never had to pay for them with your money.
So what happened to your money that paid for those minutes & bandwidth you didn't use?
The money becomes pure profits for the providers.
Where's openmedia on this issue I ask?
Those providers are raking in millions every month off bought & paid for cell minutes & bandwidth that are never used & simply expire.
The carriers form budgets and plan capital expenditures knowing they are going to have X dollars over the next 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, etc, a business with large capital investments can't play it by ear as a pricing model, they would fail.
That said both Bell and Rogers ( I suspect telus as well but I haven't looked) have 365 day $100 prepaid cards, which you can couple data packages with and pay per use with no extra fees,
Works out to a approximately $32 per month for a teen to have unlimited BBM, SMS, and talking after 6PM if you buy $100 prepaid cards, which is cheaper than any other way of putting a smartphone into a students hands
I pay 49.95 plus tax per year, unlimited calling & North America wide long distance. No texting but who honestly needs it, I watch kids texting each from a cross the room. I have Internet & can email people if they like.
15-20 years a family of four or five could expect to pay $540 per year for TV & phone. Today that doesn't even cover a decent TV package for a year, maybe 6 months worth of TV.
Also When you purchase a car you're not asking the manufacturer to sell you the car for less than they paid for it. the Average cost for a Smartphone to the Carriers is $300 yet they sell them to us for $200ish, So they require an obligation to allow for the repayment.
While the cost to get out of contracts is outlandish, I'm glad to see the carriers have been prepping for this with the introduction of tab payments which means I pay off the value of my phone and I can cancel my contract, and renegotiate for a new one.
The Mobile phone industry is the only industry that we seem to think contracts are meaningless, if your employer entered into a contract with you and signed it saying they would pay you $50,000 a year for the next 3 years, and then 2 years into it they said, Hmmmm we're not happy with this arrangement, you're fired. No we wont pay you anything, just pack up and go. how you you react? that is what we are saying to the teleco industry.
StephenBB81.
Re-reading my posting, I am not sure that I put my thoughts into the best order. My major objection to the Cell phone Carriers is them not allowing me to take my 'phone to use with another carrier after my initial contract is over. I have PAID for that 'phone and it should not be "locked in" to prevent me from having the freedom to go to another provider after the contract has expired. That was the analogy I tried to present. As far as the cost to the carriers of the equipment, well, frankly I do not not have any positive proof but there have been earlier postings from individualls purporting to have worked at some of the carriers and they have given purchasing costs ( from the Cell-phone manufacturers) as being much lower than what you state.I have heard some as low as $ 50.00. This admittedly has not been proven and it is really hard to get this type of information from a reliable source. Comparing our "rights" in Canada, we are way behing the Europeans in the Communication business and many other areas. I think we we have a good case to expect more.
Sure the CRTC will make a couple small changes & then declare consumers are protected from the big bad telcos. The telcos will be chuckling in the background as usual, since they themselves would have created the changes.
The only way to fight the telcos is through the courts, not via arms length government agencies controlled & run by industry lobbyists.
Don't like the deal your getting for your cell phone package, disgusted by the fees. Then do something about it, dump your cell phone & get a VOIP service, I did!
We survived pretty well as a society for many thousands of years without cell phones.
If you are not happy with your service change your provider, CALL your provider every week looking for discounts, and looking for better pricing, call other carriers
If the carriers are fielding 1000's of calls and people pay for the services they NEED not the safety net services they are sold then their bottom line is hurt and they'll need to fix their call issues by bringing prices down.
it isn't an easy task but people have to speak with time and wallets
I rather think they count on people not spending their time in this fashion.