|
By
LaToya Deann Rembert Esq. CMOR Government Affairs
Analyst
New bills continue to emerge that will keep CMOR actively defending the autonomy of the survey research industry. Issues that began with just one state have now emerged into a multiple state matter. In particular, outsourcing legislation concerning call centers has expanded greatly beyond the state of Florida. Actions concerning push polling have also increased with vague language that has the potential to affect legitimate survey research. States have also sought action to implement spyware legislation in response to action on the federal level. Predictive dialer issues also continue to emerge. A new bill has also been introduced, however, that requires survey researchers to register in this state. These issues and others that have been discussed in past articles lend itself to industry action. This article will focus on the most prevalent bills that require action and industry concern.
OUTSOURCING AND CALL CENTERS
Matters concerning call center legislation and outsourcing are merging into the same issues of concern for survey research purposes. The issues concern call centers and the use of personal information for outsourcing purposes. Each bill seeks to require disclosure of possible sponsorship or authorized representative information if requested by the consumer. The trend with this particular legislation is likely to continue for the remainder of the legislative session. All bills mentioned in this section have been given a CMOR Industry Threat Level of High. The legislation is of a top priority to CMOR. As a result, CMOR is currently developing correspondence to the sponsors and legislative staff of each bill, and will follow up with other relevant contact measures.
Minnesota : Has introduced a bill that requires that any person who receives a telephone call or places a telephone call to a customer service call center has the right upon request to:
- Know the identification of the city, state, and country where the customer service employee is located,
- Know the name or registered alias of the customer service employee,
- Know the name of the employer of the caller with whom the person is speaking, and
- Speak to a qualified employee of the company or government agency with whom the person is doing business.
Connecticut: Has introduced a bill that requires that within the first thirty seconds of making a call on behalf of a call center, the customer service employee must state (1) the employee’s name or registered alias, (2) the name of the call center by whom the employee is employed, (3) the city, state and country in which the employee is located, and (4) if applicable, the name and telephone number of an authorized representative of the entity utilizing the services of the call center.
Arizona: Has introduced a bill whichrequires a consumer services employee (bill is in regards to consumer service and customer service call centers) before the beginning of the solicitation and sales presentation to disclose to the consumer:
- The complete address of the physical location, including the city, state and country from which the seller, solicitor, or customer services employee is making the telephone solicitation and the complete street address of the seller’s principal location.
- The legal name of the seller on whose behalf the solicitor is making the solicitation or the employer of the consumer services employee.
- The solicitor’s or consumer services employee’s true legal name.
- That the purpose of the call is to sell merchandise
The bill also provides that any person who receives a telephone call from or places a telephone call to a consumer sales call center or a customer service call center, on request, has the right to speak to a qualified employee of the company or government agency with which the person is doing business. CMOR will more than likely suggest language clarification for this bill to make certain that survey research call centers are not included.
Illinois: Has introduced a bill that requires any person who receives a telephone call from, or places a telephone call to, a customer sales call center or a customer service call center, upon request, to:
- Know the identification of the city, state, and country where the customer service employee is located,
- Know the name or registered alias of the customer services employee,
- Know the name of the employer of the person with whom the person is speaking, and
- Speak to a qualified employee of the company or government agency that person is doing business with.
The bill also provides that the call center shall not have a customers’ financial, credit, or identifying information sent to any foreign country with express written permission.
Texas: Introduced a bill which requires a customer service employee to disclose to the customer:
- The city, state, and country where the customer service employee is located,
- The name or registered alias of the customer service employee, and
- The name of the employer of the customer service employee and enable the customer to speak to an employee of the business, government agency, or other person on whose behalf the customer sales call center or customer call center has directed the customer service employee to communicate with the customer and also provides that the call center shall not have a customers’ financial, credit, or identifying information sent to any foreign country with express written permission
PUSH POLLS AND POLITICAL CALLS
Legislation regarding push polling has been quite active. The concern of the industry is, of course not push polling itself, but making sure that legitimate survey research is not included in the push polling measures. Pennsylvania, however, has introduced a push polling bill that seeks to possibly remove legitimate survey research from its design. CMOR has placed an Industry Threat Level of High on this area of legislation. CMOR is currently working with AAPOR and other industry members who rely on phone surveys as a part of their business. From the scope of information that CMOR will receive, CMOR will develop universal language and will communicate with the sponsors and legislative staff to make certain legitimate survey research is not included in the bill.
Iowa: Has introduced a bill that requires a person conducting a public opinion poll or survey of any type which relates to the nomination, election, or defeat of a candidate for public office or the passage or defeat of a ballot issue to, prior to seeking a response from any person, disclose who is responsible for the poll or survey. If the person responsible for the survey is an individual, the disclosure should include the name of the individual. If the person responsible is an organization, the disclosure shall include the name and location of the organization and the name of the officer of the organization.
Pennsylvania: Has introduced a bill directly aimed at push polling that does not appear to affect legitimate survey research. The bill defines push polling as a paid telephone survey or a telemarketing calling campaign conducted by a telemarketer that attempts to sway public policy interests by referencing an elected Federal, State or local official, candidate, group of candidates or political party when:
- The survey or campaign fails to make demographic inquiries on a relevant subset of the population consistent with standard polling industry practices.
- The telemarketer does not collect or tabulate survey results.
- The telemarketer prefaces a question regarding support for or opposition to a candidate, political party or Federal, State or local elected official on the basis of an untrue statement.
- The telemarketer incites the recipient of the call to make personal contact to a Federal, State, or local elected official for the purpose of suppressing or changing the voting position of the Federal, State or local elected official on public policy matters.
The bill also prohibits the conducting of an advocacy push poll between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. or failing to disclose promptly to any consumer during an advocacy push poll the purpose of the call, the name of the telemarketer or telemarketing business and what issue the telemarketer or telemarketing business is advocating.
Connecticut: Has introduced a bill that extends the state’s Do-Not-Call list to cover calls consisting of electronically recorded political messages.
This bill may not require any action. If the bill does not reflect any negative connotations on survey research, then no action will be needed. Yet, for the sake of clarity and consistency, language will be recommended.
Hawaii: Has introduced a bill that prohibits the use of an automatic dialing and recorded message player to make an unsolicited telephone call on behalf of a party or candidate to any telephone subscriber’s telephone number in this State if the telephone subscriber’s number appears in the latest edition of the Federal Do-Not-Call registry.
Hawaii: Has also introduced another bill that prohibits the use of an automatic dialing and recorded message player to make an unsolicited telephone call on behalf of a party or candidate to any telephone subscriber’s telephone number in this State if the telephone subscriber’s number appears in the latest edition of the Federal Do-Not-Call registry.
Missouri: Redefines telephone solicitation in regards to the Do-Not-Call list to include “for the purpose of endorsing a political candidate, requesting financial support or a vote for a political candidate, or conducting polling regarding a political candidate notwithstanding whether the data obtained from the polling is to be analyzed or discarded.”
PREDICTIVE DIALERS
The use of predictive dialers is also becoming a trend in legislation for the 2005 session. CMOR is working to protect the use of predictive dialers for survey research purposes. CMOR has also categorized this area as a high level of priority. CMOR is active to inform sponsors and legislative staff of the proper uses of predictive dialers to remove the possibility of a blanket provision that will affect the survey research industry.
New York: Has introduced a bill that prohibits a person from operating a predictive dialer in any manner that results in a telephone call connection for which no person, acting as an agent or telemarketer, is immediately available to converse with a person or answering machine located at the number called.
SURVEY REGISTRATION
This legislation requires registrations for surveys for candidates in legislative office. CMOR’s concern is the burden that would be imposed on the survey research industry for companies that are required to register. Moreover, it affects the self regulation system of governance that has been in place in the survey research industry and will produce wide spreading effects if this type of legislation was to continue a trend. CMOR has imposed an industry threat level of high on this particular bill. This bill is similar to a matter that was presented to the industry during the last legislative session. CMOR, in response, sent correspondence to staffers of that particular bill and the bill ultimately died. CMOR will impose the same practice with this bill by creating contact to send to the sponsors of the bill and will follow up with additional contact, if needed.
Indiana: Has introduced a bill thatrequires an organization that distributes surveys or questionnaires to candidates for legislative office to register with the election division. The organization is required to file with the election division 1) a copy of each survey or questionnaire distributed 2) the organization’s position on each question and 3) the candidate’s response.
SPYWARE
States have sought to impose actions against the use of spyware this legislative session. As the session continues, legislation in this area continues to emerge. CMOR is closely monitoring this issue on the state level. Yet, similar action is also occurring on the Federal level. For the most part, states seem to focus on the deceptive uses of spyware. The states that have sought action on this matter include: Alabama, Arizona, California, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington. CMOR will make certain that legitimate uses for online survey research purposes are not affected by the scope of the legislation. CMOR is also treating legislation in this area as a high level of priority. Though there is federal action in this area, there has not been any indication that the federal law will preempt the states from also making laws covering the area. As a result, CMOR is active to review all spyware legislation and look for the potential of any hazards that may affect the online survey research community. CMOR will then follow up with proper sponsors and legislative contacts and will proceed with additional contacts accordingly.
CMOR will continue its detailed state legislative tracking of issues that may concern the survey research industry. CMOR will be certain to keep the industry informed of our contacts and progress on all legislative action. Stay abreast of the issues with the latest news in state legislative action in future CMOR newsletters, including all relevant state legislative contacts.
|
