With the spate of disruptions to telecoms, especially Internet, service across the Caribbean, should we be holding local service providers more accountable?


Over the past four to six weeks, a number of Caribbean countries, especially Jamaica, have been experiencing consistently poor telecoms, and especially Internet, service. With respect to Internet access,  generally, intermittent or fluctuating connectivity, and no connectivity at all was experienced, which could last for well over three hours, in some instances. While it might appear that such disruptions were limited to Flow, the incumbent Internet Service Provider (ISP) in many Caribbean countries, Digicel networks reportedly also experienced similar challenges.

As reported in the media, some telecoms regulators in the region have requested the telcos provide information on the major disruptions that had occurred. However, such information does not yet appear to have been made public, either through from the regulator, or by the telcos themselves.

Limited competition, limited choice

For the paying customer, and noting the increasing importance of telecoms, especially the Internet in our daily lives, it is quite disconcerting that the telcos tend not to proffer any explanation when consistently poor service is experienced, as has occurred over the past few weeks. However, with the recent spate of disruptions without explanation, customers might be hard-pressed not to construe the behaviour by the telcos as showing a lack of regard.

Having said this, it must also be highlighted that in many countries across the region, and thanks to the merger of Flow and LIME, which were the major players in the Internet service segment, competition in that space may no longer exist. Digicel, which recently launched Digicel Play, is still rolling out that multi-play service (subscriber TV, Internet, voice telephony) across the region, and so may not yet be seen as a true contender. Hence, for all intents and purposes Caribbean consumers may have little choice of ISP in their respective countries, and may just be expected to endure the inconveniences experienced.

In a recent article, Competition versus economies of scale: the challenge of telecoms in the Caribbean, we noted that Caribbean countries are challenged to maintain competition due to the small population of the majority of countries, which generally is under 250,000 inhabitants. As a result, those markets tend to be able to sustain no more than three carriers, but usually end up with two, due to mergers and acquisitions that have occurred, thus limiting the choice of services providers available to consumers.

A country taking action

Consistent with our position in the aforementioned article, the Cayman Islands appears to be taking some action. In  response to complaints from consumers on a spate of ICT network and service outages, the local regulator, the Information and Communications Technology Authority (ICTA) has established Outage Reporting Rules for all its licensees, and includes fines for non-compliance. According to the ICTA Managing Director, Mr. Alee Fa’amoe:

After the last major disruption of service by one of our licensees, we realized that we need to officially obligate all of our licensees to notify us when there are interruptions to their services. In the past, we’ve relied on them to do it as a matter of courtesy which has worked reasonably well. However, we felt we had to formalise the arrangement as the number of complaints from customers continue to increase.

It’s a matter of accountability to the regulator, but more importantly, the customers. Consumers are simply not receiving the expected level of service for which they pay licensees each month and licensees need to answer for that. It is our mandate to ensure that they do.

(Source:  Cayman Compass)

Quality of service provisions may need to be revisited

The posture of the ICTA in the Cayman Islands is highly commendable, as it not only seeks to proactively remedy a difficulty or inconsistency it has observed, but also requires the telcos to be more responsive and accountable. However, the matter at hand speaks to a wider issue: the extent to which the Quality of Service (QoS) provisions that have been established address some of the real challenges that are being experienced. Traditionally, QoS tended focus on the basic voice telephony service and general operational practices, as the examples below highlight.

  • minimum waiting time for connection of service (working days)
  • number of billing error per 1000 bills
  • call completion success rate for local and for international calls
  • unreported and reported faults cleared within a specified time, usually a minimum of 24 hours
  • repeated loss of service within a specified period (usually a month)

Whilst some of the metrics might still be relevant, to an appreciable degree, many could benefit from being made more stringent, and new metrics added, to take into account the technological advances that have occurred, the new and emerging services, and with the increasing importance of telecoms to everyday life. Having said this, it must be emphasised that regulators would still need monitor performance and adherence to whatever provisions that are established. However, at the very least, they would have a clear basis for their investigations, which would be done for and on behalf of the citizens they serve.

 

Image credit:  liz west (flickr)

____________