CRTC Considering Rogers’ Request to Delay Wireless Code Revisions



According to a report by The Star,  the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has agreed to consider Rogers’ request to delay wireless code revisions, which include a change in the way customers are billed when data usage goes over their contract’s limit. The carrier has reportedly requested a delay due to the complexity of adjusting its IT system.

“Staff considers that a timely determination of the substantive issues raised in the application will assist with consumers’ ability to make informed decisions about their wireless services, a key objective of the wireless code,” Nanao Kachi, the CRTC’s director for social and consumer policy, wrote in a Nov. 10 letter to Rogers.

An emailed statement from Rogers on Tuesday said it will have “the vast majority” of required changes in place by Dec. 1, including elimination of its unlocking fees. But the company added, “There are a few areas where we need some more time to put in place the technical and billing system changes, and the customer impact is very low.”

Back in June, the regulator had announced that only the wireless account holder on family or shared plans can consent to overage and roaming charges, unless others on the plan are expressly authorized to approve the costs. The revised wireless code, which originally went into effect in 2013, would tie data caps for shared plans to single accounts, no matter how many devices are listed.

The revised wireless code of conduct also calls for the elimination of the carriers’ ability to charge customers for unlocking their devices, so they can work on a competitor’s network. 

The CRTC has now given other wireless carriers until Friday to comment on their positions regarding the matter.


  • raslucas

    Rogers can tell the low consumer impact to the parents of some punk kid that used tried to use his iPhone’s tethering to connect to Xbox live for a LAN party… (one of many possible genius ideas a kid can have)

  • Bill___A

    The idea is to cooperatively get the needed changes in place, not to further frustrate the issue. Admittedly Rogers should have asked for the extension sooner, but as their competitors weigh in on whether to support or reject this request, they need to consider if they will be in such a situation someday. It is not an easy task to change complex IT systems overnight, and I say this as an IT professional, not as anyone sympathizing with the carriers.

  • johnnygoodface

    The key here is : “The revised wireless code, which originally went into effect in 2013″… They had 4 years to prepare… How lame is that!

  • Kris

    Bill, I am in IT as well. I understand the changes like this are/cannot be done overnigh, that’s why enough time now was given for the careers to prepare and make this change. When we have tight deadline projects, we work backwards from the go live date, not asking to extend the date because of reasons which could have been controlled. Rogers asking to delay the implementation at 11th hour is absolutely ridiculous, in my opinion.

  • Lee Miers

    This is all bull. They have had more than enough time

  • Lee Miers

    Anyone from the CRTC that would allow this delay should be fired. And Rogers should be heavely fined. For not meeting the deadline.

  • Bill___A

    The 11h hour is not great. I am not well read up on the timelines, was it 4 years ago or was it earlier this year?
    One thing I have unfortunately noticed in IT projects is when Finance people meddle in them, it becomes often a much worse situation.

  • Andy

    Keyword is “originally”; the Code came into effect 2013, but the revision Rogers is referring to only was announced June 2017. This is about having only the account holder give permission for data overages.

  • mackman6151

    “would tie data caps for shared plans to single accounts, no matter how many devices are listed” – meaning if the overage cap is 1gb/device it now becomes 1gb per account (I.e. 10 phones, 1 phone goes 1gb over and the rest have 0 wiggle room)? Or meaning each device can go 1gb over? I’m not sure how this is a benefit to the consumer if the existing way allows you to set individual overages (I.e. teens phone at 1gb over and parents phone at 4gb over) and this way you’re more constricted…..