Customer Complaint Process Implementation - Eugene Water ...

M E M O R A N D U MEUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARDPUBLIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENTTO: Commissioners Farmer, Brown, Cassidy, Cunningham and ErnstFROM: Lance Robertson, Public Affairs ManagerDATE: April 13, 2010SUBJECT: Customer Complaint Process ImplementationIssue StatementThe Board would like to be updated on a regular basis about the progress of complaints orinquiries that are received by commissioners, either individually or during Public Inputduring regular meetings.Background and discussionEWEB staff has proposed guidelines or protocols for how to keep Commissioners informedabout the staff’s progress in handling customer complaints or inquiries that are receivedthrough e-mails, phone calls, face-to-face contact or during the public input time duringBoard meetings.At the Board’s Oct. 6, 2009, work session, Debra Smith, EWEB’s Director of Employee,Customer & Community Services, provided an overview of the types of complaints/inquiriesdirected to EWEB staff and to Commissioners. She also outlined some staff-suggestedguidelines and procedures for tracking and reporting on the progress Board-levelcomplaints/inquiries.A copy of the Oct. 6, 2009, memo is attached. In general, the General Manager’sadministrative assistant – with assistance from Public Affairs -- would develop a system forrecording incoming complaints/inquiries, assigning responsibility to a specific staff person,and keeping track of the progress of the customer’s complaint. The Board would receive areport on a quarterly basis.Commissioners always have the option of deciding whether to notify staff when theyreceive feedback about operational issues from customers. If so, the procedure presentedin the Oct. 6 memo calls for Commissioners to notify the General Manager via e-mail. TheGeneral Manager’s administrative assistant, ECC Division Director and Public AffairsManager should be copied on all notifications.EWEB Public Affairs has been working with the General Manager’s Office to develop aworkable procedure that would provide you with the information you need withoutincreasing staff workload beyond what is reasonable. The procedure also should be simpleand easy to understand and administer.1

The tracking procedure is limited to complaints or inquiries received by Commissioners thatare operational in nature (not related to a pending Board-level decision or action, such asrate increases, bonding decisions, policy decisions, etc.) For example, there were about150 formal appeals filed by customers in 2009 related to billing issues and about 300liability claims. EWEB has procedures in place to consider these appeals and claims, andmost are resolved within a reasonable amount of time. There also are an undeterminednumber of informal complaints or inquiries received annually by individual staff members.As the Oct. 6, 2009, memo notes, the vast majority of these customer contacts are handledand/or resolved by individual staff members. An attempt to capture, record and track theprogress of these complaints would add considerably to the workload of severaldepartments.RecommendationThe General Manager’s Office, in collaboration with Public Affairs, has created a simpletable or spreadsheet to begin tracking Board-level complaints and inquiries related tooperational issues. This complaint/inquiry log will include the date of when it was received,how it was received, list the EWEB staff person who is responsible for tracking orresponding to the complaint, the nature of the complaint, and any action or resolution thatresulted.Beginning in July 2010, you will begin receiving a quarterly report that tracks the progressof these complaints.Staff also will make efforts to provide informal updates to the individual Commissioner whooriginally received a customer complaint/inquiry, when appropriate.No action is necessary. If you have questions, please call me at 541-685-7371.2

M E M O R A N D U MEUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARDEMPLOYEE CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES DIVISIONTO: Commissioners Farmer, Brown, Cassidy, Cunningham and ErnstFROM: Debra SmithDATE: October 6, 2009SUBJECT: Customer Complaint ProcessIssue Statement:There is a need to develop a more structured procedure for resolving, tracking andcommunicating operational-level complaints or comments received by commissioners.Background and discussion:Commissioners have expressed a desire to develop guidelines or protocols for how tohandle customer complaints or inquiries that are received through e-mails, phone calls,face-to-face contact or during the public input time during Board meetings.Complaints directed to EWEB staffCurrently, complaints directed to individual departments at EWEB are handled by the groupresponsible for the underlying issue. For example, a customer may call Customer Servicewith a complaint about tree trimming; that complaint is routed to the utility arborist forresolution. In some cases, the arborist may seek advice and help from Public Affairs, if theissue appears to involve more than a single customer.There are two formal processes for certain kinds of complaints that cannot be resolved bythe department responsible for the underlying issue. Billing complaints have an appealsprocess, in which a group of EWEB employees from a variety of departments haveauthority to resolve a customer’s electric or water billing issue. Appeals are filed bycustomers who do not feel that their billing concerns were adequately addressed byindividual customer service staff.Year to date 2009, there have been 138 billing appeals filed, resulting in a total of $17,679in credits to customers. The details of these appeals are:Fees/Rates 4 Appeals Amount Adjusted: $ 337.50Billings 13 Appeals Amount Adjusted: $664.00Water 72 Appeals Amount Adjusted: $11,863.29Electric 5 Appeals Amount Adjusted: $78.041

Deposit 18 Appeals Amount Adjusted: $2,135.92Customer Care 26 Appeals Amount Adjusted: $2,600.00As you can see, half of the appeals have been from Water, mainly water leaks, resulting in67 percent of the credits to customers.The second process involves customer claims that EWEB’s actions have damagedproperty. These usually are investigated by a third-party claims investigator hired byEWEB. The investigator makes a recommendation to EWEB Corporate Services staff.Claims are resolved either by a monetary offer or denial by EWEB. Customers who are notsatisfied have the option of seeking resolution through the legal system.In 2008, there were 291 liability claims filed, and EWEB paid out $175,438. Twelve claimswere denied. However, many claims are closed before final resolution, usually because thecustomer fails to continue the process with documentation that would help determine thevalidity of a claim.EWEB also has developed guidelines and procedures for what customers can expect fromemployees when they have a complaint or disagreement. These procedures weredeveloped and adopted by EWEB in response to a suggestion by the NeighborhoodLeaders Council, following the collapse of a transmission tower near Covey Lane during awind storm. These procedures are intended to guide EWEB employees as they workthrough specific customer complaints or issues. These guidelines have been posted on theweb site at www.eweb.org (under both “Call Customer Service” and “Contact Us”).EWEB staff has begun providing copies of e-mails and other documentation of customerappreciations as a way of making sure the Board has a more balanced view of customerinteractions with Customer Service and other departments at EWEB. The annualBenchmark Survey continues to show a very high level of customer satisfaction, witharound 80 percent giving EWEB very good to excellent satisfaction rankings. An extremelylow percentage of customers (less than 2 percent) give EWEB low rankings in satisfaction.EWEB’s intent is to resolve as many complaints or issues as possible at the time of thecustomer contact (phone call, in-person visit, e-mails). For example, Customer ServiceAnalysts have the flexibility to waive certain fees for customers under certain conditions. AllCSAs and other employees are undergoing Critical Thinking training to assist them indecision-making at the initial customer-contact level.Several other recent actions should reduce customer complaints. Customer call volumehas increased substantially since the economic crisis began. Maintaining the appropriatestaffing levels in Customer Service is important to reduce wait times and dropped callvolume. EWEB recently launched a feature that allows customers to use a debit or creditcard to pay bills using the new automated phone system. The Board’s recent approval of amore flexible Community Care assistance program also will help.In addition, EWEB is exploring the idea of using an independent mediation service toresolve complex issues and claim disputes. Staff is just in the initial stages of exploring thisoption.2

Complaints directed to CommissionersIt is EWEB staff’s desire that Board members continue to field inquiries about policy-leveldecisions that the Board has made or may make in the future. Staff is available to providebackground information when appropriate. However, there is a need to develop a morestructured procedure for how commissioners relay operational-level complaints orcomments to appropriate EWEB staff, and then get information back to commissionersabout how a complaint was handled and/or resolved.Recommendation:EWEB staff proposes the following guidelines and procedures for complaints received bycommissioners:When a commissioner receives an operational-level complaint, he or she has theoption of notifying the General Manager via e-mail. The commissioner shouldinclude the original e-mail from the customer, if applicable. The General Manager’ssecretary (currently Judy Chase) and the Employee, Customer and CommunityServices Division Director (Debra Smith) should be copied on all e-mails.The GM’s secretary will log the complaint and send an e-mail back to the full Board,letting commissioners know that a complaint has been received, the nature of thecomplaint/comment, and that it is being researched or investigated. This is intendedto avoid duplication should multiple commissioners receive a complaint from thesame customer.The General Manager will assign responsibility for investigating or resolving thecomplaint to appropriate staff. The ECCSD director will assign responsibility in theGM’s absence. The GM’s secretary will make note of the assignment in a complaintlog.The EWEB staff member assigned to the complaint shall inform the customer thathis or her complaint is being looked into. Property damage complaints are likely tobe assigned to EWEB’s normal claims process, while billing issues are likely to behandled through EWEB’s regular appeals process.Staff will investigate the complaint, resolve the complaint if appropriate, and followup directly with the customer. If a commissioner wishes to follow up with thecustomer, he or she should make that preference known at the time the complaint isinitially forwarded to the General Manager.After the customer is contacted, an e-mail will be sent to the full Board, explaininghow the issue was resolved.The GM Secretary will update the complaint log with the resolution and date ofcustomer contact.The Board will receive a quarterly report showing all complaints received, resolvedand the date of customer contact.Requested Action:No action requested at this time. If you have questions, please call me at 685-7196 or 517-2805.3