A former 20-year San Diego Gas & Electric employee filed a wrongful termination suit, alleging the utility fired him for complaining about “fraudulent and illegal” bill collection practices. David Bryant claims in a lawsuit filed May 24 in San Diego Superior Court that the utility in 2008 began a policy of disproportionately targeting poor and densely-populated areas for collection notices. Bryant started out in SDG&E’s billing department as a bill collection clerk in 1989. He was a senior collector when he was fired 22 years later. Instead of SDG&E distributing hand-delivered collection notices equitably across its service territory, the utility pinpointed densely-populated areas, since more notes could be delivered, according to Bryant. Ratepayers are charged $9 for each of the hand-delivered notes, which are known as first-call notices. “SDG&E targets its poor ratepayers because they tend to live in smaller units, in larger apartment complexes, allowing the limited number of SDG&E collection employees to deliver more $9 first call notices in a single day,” states the complaint. “To increase monthly miscellaneous revenue, SDG&E disproportionately targets densely populated areas.” Bryant alleges he complained for years that certain areas of the San Diego region were being unfairly targeted so that the utility could get “more bang for its buck.” It also used a limited number of collection workers, which culminated with Bryant’s firing on March 30. SDG&E says the termination was for “extremely inappropriate conduct.” “Basically, he was terminated because he violated company policy,” utility spokesperson Michelle Nixon said. When asked to elaborate, Nixon stated she was unable. “Because it’s a personnel issue, we have to be extremely careful of what we say,” she explained. However, in a prepared statement, SDG&E said that the decision to fire Bryant was made after a “thorough investigation of allegations that he conducted himself at work in a manner that violated company policies” and that 40 employees were interviewed as part of the investigation. SDG&E also flatly denies the plaintiff’s claims. “Mr. Bryant’s allegations that SDG&E engaged in wrongdoing [or unfair practices] are completely false,” the statement partially reads. In his lawsuit, Bryant says his firing was retaliation for speaking out against the “unlawful” collection practices and that he’s entitled to recover compensatory and punitive damages, as well as lost wages and attorney fees. Bryant’s attorney, Daniel Gilleon, acknowledged that it’s the indigent customers who are more likely to not pay their utility bills, but says it’s unfair that those customers are being targeted with the $9 first-call notices sooner and more frequently than customers in less-dense and rural neighborhoods who also don’t pay their bills on time.
