Got an interesting situation here in Charlotte. Duke Energy's key accounts manager approached me about signing some kind of non-compete agreement in exchange for "preferred auditor status" on their large commercial accounts. They're offering expedited meter data access and dedicated rep support, but want me to agree not to work with competitive energy suppliers for those accounts. This feels sketchy to me - has anyone else encountered this? Seems like it could violate CUBA independence standards.
Duke Energy tried to get me to sign non-compete - is this normal?
Sam, that's a huge red flag. Up here in Alaska we don't have deregulation issues like you do down south, but this sounds like Duke trying to control the auditing process. Any agreement that limits your ability to recommend legitimate competitive options to your clients undermines your professional independence. I'd run from this deal.
Patty's right - this is textbook conflict of interest. Here in Washington state, PSE tried something similar a few years back. The moment you sign that agreement, you can't provide objective advice to your clients. Your CUBA certification requires independence from utility influence. Don't let Duke's carrot-on-a-stick approach compromise your ethics.
I'm also in Phoenix dealing with APS, and they've made similar overtures. The "preferred auditor" programs are becoming more common as utilities try to control the narrative around rate optimization. The problem is once you're in bed with them, you lose credibility with clients who need honest assessments of all their options, including competitive supply.
Here in Georgia, I've seen Georgia Power try this approach with some of the larger auditing firms. The ones who took the deal ended up losing clients once word got out that they weren't recommending competitive options. Your reputation for independence is worth more than any utility partnership. Clients hire us specifically because we're supposed to be unbiased advocates.
Thanks everyone - this confirms my gut feeling. The Duke rep made it sound like a great opportunity, but you're all right about the independence issue. I'm going to decline and stick with the standard auditing relationship. Better to work a little harder for meter data than compromise my ability to serve clients objectively.
Smart move Sam. I know it's tempting when utilities dangle these partnerships, especially when data access can be such a pain. But once you sign something like that, you're essentially working for the utility instead of your client. The CUBA ethics training covers this exact scenario - maintain independence at all costs.
Here in Louisville with LG&E, I've found that maintaining good relationships with utility reps doesn't require formal agreements. Professional courtesy and competent work usually gets you the cooperation you need without compromising ethics. Duke might respect your position more if you explain why independence matters to the auditing process.
Walt's approach works well. Down here with Dominion Energy in Charleston, I've built solid relationships with their commercial team just by being professional and thorough. They know I'll recommend competitive supply when it makes sense, but they also know my technical work is solid and my clients pay their bills. Mutual respect beats contractual obligations every time.
George, that's exactly the kind of relationship I want to maintain with Duke. Professional but independent. I think I'll use your approach - explain that my value to clients depends on maintaining objectivity, which ultimately benefits everyone including the utility when clients make informed decisions.
Sam handled this perfectly. For newer CUBA members reading this, remember that utility partnerships can seem attractive but they fundamentally compromise your ability to serve clients. The moment a utility has financial leverage over your business decisions, you've lost the independence that makes auditing valuable. This is exactly why our ethics standards exist - protect them at all costs.