MCK/sid 11/27/2002

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Communications Workers of America, Local 9415, Kathleen Kinchius, President, Complainant, vs. Pacific Bell, (U 1001 C), Defendant.

Case 92-04-007 (Filed April 3, 1992)

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING

DIRECTING PARTIES TO MEET AND CONFER

This ruling directs the parties to meet and confer, and after that to be prepared to attend a prehearing conference (PHC), for the purpose of discussing issues raised in the parties' comments filed in response to the Administrative Law Judge's Ruling Proposing Dismissal (ALJ Ruling) issued in this docket on September 17, 2002. Opening comments on this ruling were filed by the complainant, Communications Workers of America, Local 9415 (CWA), on October 1, 2002. Reply comments were filed by defendant, Pacific Bell Telephone Company (Pacific), on October 16, 2002.

Background

As noted in the ALJ Ruling, this case was filed more than 10 years ago. After extensive motion practice, hearings on the four principal issues the parties agreed to submit for decision were held on June 10 and 11, 1993. The ALJ Ruling noted that since much of this hearing time had been devoted to the adequacy of the training Pacific was giving its operators and service representatives on Commission monitoring rules, and to the adequacy of the forms Pacific was using in connection with monitoring, the record could be so stale that a decision on these issues might no longer be justified.

The ALJ Ruling also noted that another issue at the 1993 hearings was Pacific's proposed use of a recorded announcement to inform customers that their calls might be monitored for quality assurance purposes. The ruling inquired whether any decision was necessary on this issue, since "it is common knowledge that the use of such announcements has become ubiquitous since the hearing in this case was held, while the use of a periodic beep tone to warn of monitoring has all but disappeared." (ALJ Ruling, p. 2.)