---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <8760xlmav5.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> Date: 19 Feb 2016 03:13:02 -0400 From: Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> Subject: Re: Comcast outages anger thousands across US HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> writes: > The Philadelphia Electric Company got flack for a slow response time > storm damage repair. Part of the criticism was that they had ceased > pruning back trees near suburban power lines, allowing broken trees to > more likely take down a power line, which happened in the last storm. > The public said it was willing to pay more for better service > reliability. Rates went up only slightly, certainly not "3 or 4 > times", and tree trimming was resumed. In the last major storm, there > were very few outages. Since the privatization of the powerco in Nova Scotia, that kind (tree pruning) of maintainance has vanished or been limited to brief and localized episodes of poorly executed trimming. The *norm* for Nova Scotia is stormy weather: gusts, gales, blizzards, wet snow, torrential rain. So now rural communities can anticipate that *any* weather more violent than showers, stiff breeze or light flurries will cause outages. The obvious inference is that it's cheaper to deploy a small number of repair crews when commonplace weather (or, of course, a real storm) has bent a tree branch or or dropped a tree on a line than to deploy trimming crews routinely in good weather. That "externalizes the internal diseconomy" of maintainance to the users in the form of lost heat, light, water (rural, y'know; water has to be pumped), refigeration or cooking, crashed computers and/or the expense of installing and operating gen sets at each household. I would further infer thereby that telecom companies would use the same reasoning, mutatis mutandem, about whatever maintainance they find to be an "internal diseconomy". -- Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada ------------------------------ Message-ID: <barmar-DB0FE1.02392919022016@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 02:39:29 -0500 From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> Subject: Re: Comcast outages anger thousands across US In article <bd793a29-e888-4db0-8492-b08932da1854@googlegroups.com>, HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote: > On Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, David Clayton wrote: > > > Do people actually realise that companies will not ever have heaps of > > people sitting around 99.9% of the time just in case there is a rare > > major outage simply to pander to their need for "support" (which usually > > means just telling them that the problem is being worked on)? > > In my opinion... > > I don't think it would require "heaps of people sitting around" to > maintain greater reliability, just better monitoring centers, and a > bit more redundancy. Also, there are routine maintenance needs that > staff could work on and be reassigned to deal with an emergency. > Often critical employees are on-call in case of rare emergency. There > is also the issue of strengthening the infrastructure to prevent > outages in the first place. The above message was talking about having enough Customer Service Reps to handle the huge increase in support calls during an outage, not the technicians who monitor and fix the service. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ Message-ID: <na84n7$ego$1@dont-email.me> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 22:24:40 -0000 (UTC) From: David Clayton <dc33box-cdt@yahoo.com.au> Subject: Re: Comcast outages anger thousands across US On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 02:39:29 -0500, Barry Margolin wrote: > In article <bd793a29-e888-4db0-8492-b08932da1854@googlegroups.com>, > HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, David Clayton wrote: >> >> > Do people actually realise that companies will not ever have heaps of >> > people sitting around 99.9% of the time just in case there is a rare >> > major outage simply to pander to their need for "support" (which >> > usually means just telling them that the problem is being worked on)? >> >> In my opinion... >> >> I don't think it would require "heaps of people sitting around" to >> maintain greater reliability, just better monitoring centers, and a bit >> more redundancy. Also, there are routine maintenance needs that staff >> could work on and be reassigned to deal with an emergency. >> Often critical employees are on-call in case of rare emergency. There >> is also the issue of strengthening the infrastructure to prevent >> outages in the first place. > > The above message was talking about having enough Customer Service Reps > to handle the huge increase in support calls during an outage, not the > technicians who monitor and fix the service. Who can essentially do absolutely nothing during an outage apart from tell people that there is an outage - which should be able to done by a recorded message except people have some bizarre need to be able to complain to someone who has no ability to actually help them. The world is increasing filling with people who feel "entitled" to have their pointless needs satisfied like 3 year old children who complain to their parents that they don't like the rain and will keep screaming until it stops. -- Regards, David. David Clayton, e-mail: dc33box-cdt@yahoo.com.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a measure of how many questions you have. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <ad55940b-a51b-4a5d-807d-63ec70b518a2@googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:25:18 -0800 (PST) From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: Comcast outages anger thousands across US On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-5, Barry Margolin wrote: > HAncock4 wrote: > > I don't think it would require "heaps of people sitting around" to > > maintain greater reliability, just better monitoring centers, and a > > bit more redundancy. Also, there are routine maintenance needs that > > staff could work on and be reassigned to deal with an emergency. > > Often critical employees are on-call in case of rare emergency. There > > is also the issue of strengthening the infrastructure to prevent > > outages in the first place. > > The above message was talking about having enough Customer Service Reps > to handle the huge increase in support calls during an outage, not the > technicians who monitor and fix the service. During an outage, there is still a critical role for Customer Service Reps. The utility needs to get all reports of problems in order to properly identify hard hit areas and to deploy resources appropriately. Note that during major outages utilities make use of sub-contractors, and they, being unfamiliar with an area and not under direct management control might report an area fixed when it is not (which I have observed), and consumer complaints can serve as a check on that. In addition, during an extended outage, consumers may not have any means of communication. If power or telecom lines are out, there's a good chance a consumer's internet is out as well. Customer service reps who have access to the latest repair status and plans can give specific estimates for recovery for a particular community, which will allow people to make plans accordingly. That is, if the outage is expected to continue for several more days in certain sections, consumers need to know this so that can find alternate lodging or food. The general TV/radio broadcast news reports are for an entire large region serving millions of people, and people need to know far more specific information. I used to think extended outages (in excess of 48 hours) were a very rare thing. That is no longer true. Some consumers living in their old single house might be able to afford backup power supplies. But a 'full house' system is very expensive, and not everybody lives in their own house--this isn't an option for apartment dwellers, renters, or those folks of modest means. ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sat, 20 Feb 2016