In my last post I indicated that the Wireless Code of Conduct is not applicable to all business plans. On October 8th in CRTC Telecom Decision 2014-528, the Commission clarified that the Wireless Code is applicable to “retail mobile wireless voice and data services provided to individuals and small businesses.” The Commission also clarified that the Wireless Code applies to “corporate individual plans” and “employee purchase plans” where the individual is responsible for some or all charges related to the contract. The Decision states “The Wireless Code does not apply to “enterprise plans” as described by TCC (TELUS Communications Company), which are agreements between a service provider and a medium or large business where the individual using the service is not responsible for any of the charges incurred.”
So what is a Corporate Individual Plan (CIP)?
A Corporate Individual Plan, per the Decision is a “wireless contract between an individual and a service provider where the services are offered at a preferred rate to an employee of a medium or large business. The services are mostly for business use, although personal use is possible. The individual is responsible to the service provider for all charges associated with the account, but the individual’s employer reimburses the individual for some, but not all, of the monthly recurring charges. To obtain a “corporate individual plan” from TCC, an employer must reimburse employees for at least half of the monthly charges for services billed to the individual employee. The employer would not cover pay-per-use usage beyond the plan (including roaming charges, overage charges, etc.). In addition, each employee must use the services primarily for business purposes and sign a customer service agreement with an authorized TCC dealer.”
Are Organizations better off with an Enterprise Plan or a CIP as a result of the Wireless Code Clarification?
On the surface, it appears that there may be some merit for organizations to prefer a CIP to an Enterprise plan. There is no risk of excessive data usage charges (beyond $50 per month) or data roaming charges (beyond $100 per month). It is often these data overage charges that lead to significant expense surprises in wireless expense budgets. However, it is unlikely that the wireless providers will accept any excessive risk on data roaming overages. If the data roamer incurs a large cost, the wireless provider will also incur a significant cost from the international roaming partner. As a result, you can expect that in a CIP there is a strong likelihood that in order to enable roaming data, there will be some kind of clause that will make the enterprise responsible for any excessive data roaming charges, or that the user will accept being blocked from data roaming. As a result, it is unlikely that the Wireless Code should be a key consideration in choosing a Corporate Individual Plan or an Enterprise Plan.
Any feedback on the actual implementation of the new Wireless Code clarification in Bell, Rogers and TELUS contracts as it relates to CIP is welcome.
Recent Comments