In what could be considered one of the greatest slaps in the face by Ma Bell along with Alliant Communications, they have asked the CRTC to mandate that a customer must cancel their own service when switching to a new provider.They argue that they should be afforded the opportunity to offer new incentives to the departing customer before the switch.In this writer’s opinion, it is arrogance of the highest order.
The prime question is this; Why should they have the chance to make offers after the fact that they could make while the customer is still theirs in the first place?Is this not the intent of deregulation to a more open marketplace?A ruling by the CRTC in their favour just adds one more opportunity for these companies to essentially insult the intelligence of their customers.The customer is leaving and for their own good reasons.
They might have a better deal that might include cost savings, better service, perks or billings etc. that Bell or Alliant are not offering.These are all good reasons to change a service provider and are the exact reasons the government partially deregulated the industry in the first place.It was to provide the consumer with more choice.Now these telecoms want to partially reverse this by requiring they be given a second chance.One would think that if they saw a declining customer base, they would examine the reasons why and then act to retain or regain their market share.This is the way business should work, not go crying to the government.
Bell’s recent history of abuse of the public through its various offerings and divisions is notorious.They have attempted to control internet traffic by throttling speeds through their Sympatico operations, they have failed to lower prices to match their competitors at all levels.Their cellular services are often reported to be substandard to their competitors for quality.They have attempted to reduce or eliminate competition by forcing smaller telecoms out of their networks; services these telecoms and their clients are paying for.They have exported jobs offshore putting Canadians out of work and continue to do so.
There is very little love for Ma Bell in Canada and it would appear to be rightly so.
The CRTC is charged with protecting Canadians across a variety of communications mediums and it seems that at every turn, Bell is embroiled in some sort of controversy that is often at odds with the best interest of the public.The CRTC must stand up for Canadians and put an end to the business practices that are not in the public’s best interest no matter what company is involved.
Still, one would think that with the current economic conditions, every company would be doing its best to retain customers.Let us hope that the CRTC who are employed by Canadians, do their best to protect our interests.