eravin@dasys1.UUCP (Ed Ravin) (11/27/89)
From recent postings in comp.dcom.telecom, it appears that many colleges and universities have become the telephone company for their students living in on-campus housing. The recent nasty example was Columbia, who charges $5 for each collect call to a student, turns off an account if the long distance bill exceeds $100, provides service to the students via a Rolm switch that forces them to pay extra for data connections (sorry, no modems), charging for incomplete calls, and more. Similiar insensitive behavior has been reported at the University of Stony Brook, including insufficient trunk allocation (the cheapskates don't buy enough incoming trunks so every phone on campus appears busy during peak periods). Why aren't these local telephone service providers (for, in essence, that's what they are) regulated by their respective state public service commissions? If Columbia is adding $5 to the cost of a collect call, they should have to file a tariff with the state first. I strongly urge students at any school with an attitude like Columbia's to write to their state's public utilities commission documenting abuses that no ordinary telephone company could get away with and asking for relief. The address to complain to should be near the front of your local telephone directory (the real one, not the one provided by your school). Send copies of your letters and responses to comp.dcom.telecom. Colleges and universities can only get away with this crap if their students and staff let them! Ed Ravin | hombre!dasys1!eravin | "A mind is a terrible thing (BigElectricCatPublicUNIX)| eravin@dasys1.UUCP | to waste-- boycott TV!" Reader bears responsibility for all opinions expressed in this article.
74066.2004@compuserve.com (Larry Rachman) (11/29/89)
In a recent article, Ed Ravin laments about the abuses College
Telcos perpetrate upon students, and calls for more PSC involvement.
I'm not sure what its like today, but in 1976, in New York, there was
a section of the Public Service Commission Tarrifs dealing specificly
with so-called "Centrex Dormitory Service". Among the features of this
"service" were:
If you wanted a phone, it was your only option.
You took the number they gave you, even if it was subject to crank and
abusive calls.
They wouldn't sell you Touchtone, even though (at Stony Brook - #5
XBAR) it worked by default on about half the lines.
Intercept messages for disconnected lines would not be provided.
Your had no choice of equipment (this was back when TELCO provided it).
...and so forth. On the up side, there was a clause about how the
University Centrex attendants would provide. "...all Centrex services"
for dormitory customers. This raised quite a few eyebrows when I read
it to the Telecom manager, and did result in an end to the policy of
refusing to transfer student calls.
The problem is that a student body is by nature a transient
population, and really can't make much of an impact on a regulatory
body that takes years to make a change. The only solution that comes
to mind is the possibility of bypassing the whole mess, via an
infra-red (or microwave) link to a private house down the block.
Larry Rachmanedg@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Edward Greenberg) (11/30/89)
In the State of New York, Dormitory Service was a tarriffed item, back when it was provided by the Telco. I'm reminded of a student (I think this was Larry Rachman, another reader of the digest who may post in response, if he has anything to add) who successfully challenged a campus policy disallowing call transfer from dorm phones. The problem may be that the law (or the PSC/PUC) doesn't consider a residence provider to be a telecom provider as well, treating it like hotel service instead. -edg Ed Greenberg +1 415-694-2952 (day) uunet!apple!netcom!edg edg@cso.3mail.3com.com 76703,1070 on CompuServe
john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (11/30/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0534m01@chinacat.lonestar.org>, eravin@dasys1.UUCP (Ed Ravin) writes: > Why aren't these local telephone service providers (for, in essence, > that's what they are) regulated by their respective state public > service commissions? Simply put, they are not a common carrier or a utility. It is a private phone system in which they happen to have a means of billing associated users for their calls. This is not unlike a business keeping SMDR records and then billing its employees for suspected personal calls. If the university owns the system, it has the right to do with it what it pleases. As a student, you are not "the public". You are a "client" of the organization. Even if the school hires an outside firm to administer the operation, it is still considered a "closed system". > I strongly urge students at any school with an attitude like > Columbia's to write to their state's public utilities commission > documenting abuses that no ordinary telephone company could get away > with and asking for relief. Sorry, but I really don't think they will be interested. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com (12/01/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0534m01@chinacat.lonestar.org>, eravin@dasys1.UUCP (Ed Ravin) writes... >From recent postings in comp.dcom.telecom, it appears that many >colleges and universities have become the telephone company for their >students living in on-campus housing.... >Why aren't these local telephone service providers (for, in essence, >that's what they are) regulated by their respective state public >service commissions? If Columbia is adding $5 to the cost of a >collect call, they should have to file a tariff with the state first. Because they aren't telcos. A telco, in the legal sense, is "certificated" by the state to provide exchange service on a monopoly basis to a defined area. In Columbia's case, f'rinstance, New York Telephone is certificated. A student wanting direct outside telephones would call NYT, not, say, ConTel (who is certificated for different parts of NY State). Columbia is a reseller. That's a separate legal class. Under FCC regs, resellers may exist without regulation (technically, I think, the FCC regulates them in forebearance). They can resell INTERSTATE calls with impunity. That's what makes the AOS sleazebuckets possible. In theory, they don't have a monopoly like telcos. (You can drive down the road to the next pay phone. In some cases, you can legally demand access to the LD carrier of your choice and pay that carrier's rates.) Now if your landlord tries to impose a monopoly by limiting the telco's right to serve you directly, that would be a local contract/housing matter, not within their bailiwick. (Reality and law diverge a bit here.) States have the right to regulate INTRASTATE calls, including resale. So if NY State chose to, they could regulate Columbia's in-state rates. But if the call came from New Jersey or Fiji or anyplace outside NY State, the NY PUC would have no jurisdiction. This has worked with some AOSs, btw; if you get zinged on an in-state call, the state PUC or Attorney General can scare them off. fred
selig@udcps3.cps.udayton.edu (Paul D. Selig) (12/03/89)
I just wanted to comment from a different viewpoint on the points that Ed Ravin made about the outrageous charges that universities charge their students for calls. Here at the University of Dayton, we currently have what I consider to be a great system, which is a Meridian SL-1 switch. The university here also charges $5.00 for a collect call to a student, but with a good reason: Let's say that there are four students living in a campus apartment, and each apartment has two phones. Each student in the apartment has their own private "access code" for long distance use, and each receives their own statement of charges. If you were to make a collect call to a number in that apartment, the university has no idea who accepted the call, therefore they have no idea who to bill for the cost of the call. The $5 is used for the administrative costs and time to track down the acceptor of the call, and to have the billed call connected with the actual person. I really don't think that this is _too_ far out of line, as I would imagine that the actual costs are much higher. And, in regard to the $100 credit limit, after being a student at the University of Dayton for many years, I am still amazed at how many students will not pay their bill until their service is shut off. It happens a lot more than you might think, and the limit is imposed just to protect the university so that they may eventually get their money. Also here at the University of Dayton, students are clearly notified many times that if you let the phone ring more than 7 times, you will be billed for that call. Though I do agree that the University _should_ install call supervision equipment, they are fair in removing a charge for a call that is claimed to never have been completed. This is just a former students view on the university phone system, and my opinions do not constitute those of my employer! | | Paul Selig, Jr. Systems Administrator | --|- Computer Science Department, Anderson Center 133 | | | | The University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio 45469 --|- | BITNET: selig@dayton.bitnet ---- UUCP: selig@cps.udayton.edu or ...!uunet!ncrlnk!udcps3!selig
paul@uunet.uu.net (Paul S. Sawyer) (12/06/89)
[Please note that any comments following are my personal opinions. I make no policy for, nor do I speak for UNH. I run the UNIX System, not the switch. We are familiar with ACUS only as users of software which they own.] Many persons, apparently students, have written lately to complain about various campus phone services. Recently Paul Selig brought up a few points to which I would like to add, to help show the position that we are in as service providers.... Since Divestiture, the local telco may not want to bother with serving your dorm room, unless it is already wired. Sometimes the telco does not even have wires to the building. It is the property owner's responsibility to provide the means (space in existing conduits or on poles, or easements and in some cases costs to install conduits or poles) to serve those buildings. Some colleges/universities do not wish to do this. Some opt to let an outside agent handle this. UNH is wiring buildings as possible, trying to eventually provide service for all campus residents. If we had to act as a public utility, we would have to do this all at once and so might not do it at all, since our main job is to provide business telecommunications for staff users. In most cases, we are making use of existing equipment and capacities which are not otherwise fully used after business hours. Keeping track of even a small number of students as customers is quite different from keeping track of departmental customers, especially with no additional staff. Outside agencies such as ACUS can seem attractive when they can act as turnkey service providers. Although some larger or more fortunate institutions have central office type switches and answer supervision, we and many others do not, and it would not be cost effective to implement soon (so they tell me). TSPS or similar service which someone mentioned as available to hotels, etc., was refused to us because we ARE NOT A HOTEL under the tariff, said the telco.... We already process outside toll tapes which include collect calls, etc., so we do not charge extra for such calls, but if you attempt a fraudulent call or make an operator assisted call which gets billed to other than your own number, we have to research it, and "Bill'em, Danno" an extra $2.00. We do this whether you are student or staff, since it is preventable. We do not knowingly block access to any long distance company that is normally accessable, although our direct dial prices should be lower than those with credit card or operator surcharges. We do not charge for 1-800- 950- or local calls. Our business office treats our fees as normal student expenses, so we do not need to charge a deposit or cut you off at a line of credit. Some institutions do not want to collect telephone bills. I agree that "Colleges and universities can only get away with this crap if their students and staff let them!" [eravin@dasys1.UUCP], as ACUS and other third parties all make some arrangement with some agent of any institution they serve, one or more of President, VP, Dean of Students, Telecom Office, Buildings and Grounds, Housing Office, probably Trustees and/or State Board of Regents, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Each institution has different people making different arrangements for different services, and differs in responsiveness to student needs. As telephone service providers at UNH, we try to be responsive, we welcome complaints, and we even give credits! (sometimes... B-) But you don't call the public utilities commission because the lights in your dorm flicker every time you make popcorn... so work with whoever runs these things on YOUR campus and maybe you can get somewhere! Best of luck, Paul = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Paul S. Sawyer uunet!unh!unhtel!paul paul@unhtel.UUCP UNH Telecommunications attmail!psawyer p_sawyer@UNHH.BITNET Durham, NH 03824-3523 VOX: 603-862-3262 FAX: 603-862-2030