Daniel Przybyla, 1-866-362-2167 Ext. 13865, dprzybyla@heraldargus.com

You're not alone. National survey shows customer satisfaction dim.

LAPORTE -- Despite a recent history of low marks, Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) continues to rate near the bottom in customer satisfaction.

The J.D. Power and Associates 2006 Electric Utility Residential Customer Satisfaction Study compared similarly sized utilities across the country.

The negative report, which ranked NIPSCO second-to-last among 15 utilities in its category, was nothing new. The utility has remained below average, and several times near the bottom, when compared to other electric utilities its size for customer satisfaction since 1999.

NIPSCO is in a category with other utilities that serve between 160,000 to 400,000 customers.

The study surveyed residential customers of the nation’s largest electric utilities and scored customer satisfaction based on power quality and reliability, company image, price and value, communications, billing and payment and customer service.

According to the survey, residential customers nationally are spending 16 percent more on electricity in 2006 compared to 2005, marking the fourth consecutive year reported average monthly bills have increased.

NIPSCO spokesman Tom Cuddy said in a written statement the J.D. Power survey doesn’t tell the whole story.

“It’s important to understand that the J.D. Power survey is a perceptual survey. Our own internal transactional surveys -- telephone surveys completed after a customer requests service -- show high levels of customer satisfaction.

“Regardless, we’re always looking for ways to improve the service we provide to our customers,” he said.

United Steelworkers of America Local 12775 vice president and NIPSCO employee David Chlebek said the survey once again speaks volumes about the problematic upper-management at NIPSCO.

“It’s the same thing. It’s flat lined year after year,” Chlebek said of the surveys. “Nobody (in upper management) has a clear direction of where they’re headed. It’s not there.”

Chlebek echoed what other union officials have pointed out in the past: a communication roadblock between management and union employees.

“There’s not a two-way dialogue of how to make things better. It doesn’t exist,” he said.

A combination of procedural and personnel changes within upper-management needs to take place in order to improve the company’s image and overall operations, Chlebek said.