IZZYAS1@oac.ucla.edu (Andy Jacobson) (11/13/90)
In TELECOM Digest V10 #810: John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com>writes: >NONE of the responses obtained from GTE personel bear any resemblance >to reality. From personal experience it is possible to say that if you >want to determine anything about GTE's system, you will have to use a >back door approach. It is necessary to befriend a sympathetic employee Back in March I moved out of the locale my switch served. I wanted to keep my same number, and I of course with great dread called the GTE customer service office to inquire how. I was told I could either pay thousands of dollars one time plus hundreds a month for foreign exchange service, or I could get the handy feature "Remote Call Forwarding" (RCF) where my number would be permanently forwarded to a number of my choosing from the CO in my old neighborhood, but with no dial tone provided. On the surface this would seem like the solution. But as you might guess, it costs $80 one time, plus $25 a month, plus $0.05 per forwarded call (measured service). I _had_ basic non-measured POTS at $10 a month, and I was moving to the free call zone of the original switch. How could it be that it was so much more expensive to give me less service? All they were doing was not giving me a subscriber loop! As well, the residential CSO wouldn't handle it. I would have to completely switch my service to business class. I wasn't running a business, I just wanted to keep the same phone number on a three mile move. It was explained to me that only a business would want to keep their same number, and then only till the next directory came out. (I love having GTE tell me what I do not apparently have a right to want.) I was furious. I remember seeing in a phone book RCF was available for cheap. It was. It's called Pac*Bell. I called them up and was told that I could have it for $5 one time charge, and $2 a month, residential service, no problems, no questions asked. My number was unfortunately not in Pac *Bell-land though. How could GTE ream me like that for the same exact thing that Pac*Bell could do for cheap? I called the Public Utilities Commission. I explained the situation to the representative who apologized for being ignorant of what RCF was. The next day the fully briefed PUC representative told me that GTE never bothered to file a tariff for residential RCF, just business class, whereas Pac*Bell did both. So what could I do about it? Nothing. I can't make GTE file a tariff if they don't want to. I could file a formal complaint, but because it was not in reference to a filed tariff, it would most likely disappear in the cracks. Luckily, I had a friend in my old neighborhood who has now an extra outgoing line with free local calling. (The phone has no ringer and I use regular Call Forwarding). Maybe a month later, I'm on the phone with an AT&T rep about the cost effectiveness of buying a PBX. He tells me that the residential organization I represent could really save big on aggregate buying of LD service from AT&T (SDN I suppose). But what about local trunks? Well, if we only were in Pac*Bell land we could have them for $4 and some change a month. But in GTE land, it's $19.80 for the same damn thing. He confides in me that he has lost PBX sales in GTE land because of this factor. Who to? GTE of course! GTE's "CentraNet" (Centrex).that is, which is aimed at the PBX market, and priced per line lower than a simple non-DID outgoing trunk! Yes, GTE's got you coming and going. No doubt they're using their predatory power as common carrier to tariff PBX's out of cost effectiveness. (I should note too that it's not only AT&T's PBX, but it's also AT&T's 1ESS, and Centrex that GTE is peddling). GTE's edge however may be short-lived, as according to their CentraNet sales rep, GTE has no plans to upgrade their 1E switches, and thus no plans to offer ISDN. (I repeat from an earlier posting GTE = Generic Telephone Equivalent). All the above being bad enough, GTE's POTS is 10-20% more expensive than Pac*Bell, and GTE still uses it's status as local carrier to cross peddle it's trashy equipment. Well after 1984 they were pushing Sprint LD service down people's throats at their public offices. Still to this day GTE is doing it. (They slammed me to Sprint in July all by themselves. Sprint said GTE issued the order.) I personally think that the omission of GTE is one huge glaring error (among soooo many) of the MFJ. GTE gets away with so much that the BOC's can't, and wouldn't. A. Jacobson <izzyas1@oac.ucla.edu>