PG&E: Drug tests lacking
There was noncompliance in oversight for 950 call center workers, the utility confirms
SAN BRUNO — PG&E has violated government rules by failing to have about 950 call center workers drug tested, the utility confirmed Thursday, which prompted a demand for mandatory reports by big utilities of all potential safety violations.
PG&E’s latest disclosed violation follows the utility’s felony conviction and sentencing for crimes linked to a 2010 pipeline explosion in San Bruno that killed eight people.
The call center workers who didn’t receive the required testing for drug and alcohol use handle an array of calls, PG&E said Thursday. These include calls related to gas and electricity operations, along with questions related to customer bills and energy efficiency.
PG&E became aware of the potential violation in April 2014, but didn’t report it until this month.
“It’s outrageous that PG&E didn’t report this for three
“It’s outrageous that PG&E didn’t report this for three years; there is no excuse for that,” state senator says.
years; there is no excuse for that,” said state Sen. Jerry Hill, whose San Mateo district includes San Bruno.
PG&E wasn’t certain whether any of the 950 workers who weren’t tested were intoxicated at work or when they arrived on the job. The four call centers involved are in San Jose, Sacramento, Fresno and Stockton.
“We take our compliance obligations very seriously, which is why we self-reported this issue to the PUC,” PG&E spokesman Gregory Snapper said. “We are going through a detailed review of the facts and circumstances underlying the noncompliance to determine what caused the issues, and to institute changes intended to improve compliance performance in the future.”
The state Public Utilities Commission has required PG&E and other utilities to ensure that call center workers who handle certain types of calls be tested, as required by U.S. Transportation Department regulations.
“We are committed to a drug-free and alcohol-free workplace,” Snapper said. “PG&E’s code of conduct specifies that employees are expected to be mentally and physically fit for work, to report fit for duty, and remain fit while on duty.”
San Francisco-based PG&E acknowledged in a Feb. 9 letter to the PUC that it wasn’t following those rules for drug and alcohol tests.
“Because they handle gas emergency response calls, PG&E’s customer service representatives should be included in the Department of Transportation program,” John Higgins, PG&E’s vice president of safety and health, wrote in a letter to the PUC this month.
However, for a variety of reasons, the PG&E workers weren’t included. Chief among those: a protracted dispute with the union that represents the PG&E employees at the call centers, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The IBEW opposes the drug testing for call center workers, it stated in a letter on Feb. 10.
“We firmly oppose the company’s determination that call center customer service representatives should be subjected to random drug testing,” stated Tom Dalzell, business manager with IBEW Local 1245, based in Vacaville. “Subjecting them to urine tests would amount to a waste of ratepayer money, as well as an invasion of the workers’ privacy.”
The violation, along with a report by PG&E about an outage of its gas system in December 2015 that knocked out gas service to 6,000 customers in Discovery Bay, have prompted Sen. Hill to demand that the PUC once again require power utilities such as PG&E to report serious safety violations on a regular basis. Hill made the request in an official filing with the PUC.
The commission dropped the self-reporting requirement in September. The requirement had been instituted in September 2011, a year after the San Bruno explosion.
“No reason was given by the PUC,” Hill said. “The decision was arbitrary.”
The PUC is investigating PG&E’s failure to test the call center workers for drug and alcohol use, PUC spokeswoman Terrie Prosper said Thursday.
Hill warned that without a return to mandatory reporting by big power utilities about safety violations, utilities such as PG&E could revive prior tragedies such as the San Bruno blast.
“Voluntary reporting is what got us into the problems of the past,” Hill said. “That approach took lives in San Bruno and cost ratepayers millions of dollars.”
The San Bruno blast was caused by PG&E’s sloppy record keeping and negligent maintenance, and the PUC’s lax oversight of the utility.
“Are we measurably safer? Yes. Are we safe enough? No,” Hill said. “Give PG&E credit; they are trying. But PG&E may be too big to succeed. And it appears the PUC may be too big to succeed.”