New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
Eugene/Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility 1984-1991
COE
>
PW
>
Admin
>
Execs
>
Executive non-confidential
>
Historical
>
Eugene/Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility 1984-1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2009 11:34:05 AM
Creation date
6/1/2009 12:27:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Exec
PW_Division_Exec
Administration
PWA_Project_Area
Miscellaneous
PW_Subject
Water Pollution Control Facility
Document_Date
7/31/1993
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Section D: PLANT OPBRATIONS <br />Page 15 <br />STAFFING LEVELS AND SCHEDULING <br />Several changes in staff levels and schedulinghave <br />occurred in Operations since plant starC-up. Eigh- <br />teenplantoperators have worked a variety of fixed <br />and rotating shifts. The four shift supervisors have <br />also changed work schedules as a result of supervi- <br />sorstaff reductions. <br />At the time of plant start-up, the shift supervisors <br />and operators were working different schedules. <br />The shift supervisor worked a rotating, four-day <br />work week in two shifts. Each supervisor would <br />rotate through the four shifts over four, 28-day <br />periods. The operators worked afive-day week in <br />three shifts: day, swing, and graveyard. Operators <br />rotated days off every four weeks and rotated shifts <br />every 12 weeks. <br />This arrangement had many disadvantages. Com- <br />munication was difficult because each operator <br />hadtoworkunderfourdifferentsupervisors. Some- <br />times operators had to work under three or four <br />supervisors in one work week. The schedules also <br />made it hard for supervisors to manage and to <br />evaluate the work performance of operators. <br />To correct the problems, in July 1986 the opera- <br />tors' work schedules were changed to match the <br />supervisors' four-day work week. Under the new <br />program, five operators worked with one supervi- <br />sor continuously, and each crew began rotating <br />shifts as a team. The new schedule allowed a <br />reduction from 20 to 16 operators, which was <br />accomplished through attrition. <br />Other schedule and organizational changes have <br />allowed the plant to reduce supervisory staff from <br />four to two and to merge the process control <br />manager and maintenance manger positions into <br />one plant manager position. <br />At the end of five years of operation, the opera- <br />tionsstaff had 19 full-time employees, including a <br />plant manager, two supervisors, four Operator I's <br />(now called Wastewater Technician II's) and 12 <br />Operator II's (now called Wastewater Technician <br />III's). <br />Currently, each supervisor is responsible for two <br />operator crews. The supervisors have designated a <br />lead worker for each crew to assist in work sched <br />Ming and assignment. The two supervisors work <br />day shift but start and end their work days one hour <br />later than the regular day shift, so they can spend <br />some time with the swing shift crews. Operators <br />work fixed shifts - day or swing - determined by <br />an annual bidding process, which is based on <br />seniority. <br />Under this system, the plant has a full staff for 20 <br />hours a day, from 6 a.m. Co 2 a.m. The other four <br />hours are covered by one operator from the swing <br />shift, who stays two hours late, and by one operator <br />from the day shift, who starts two hours early. The <br />early morning duty shifts are sharedby all operators <br />on a rotating basis. <br />PROCESS CONTROL <br />Control of plant operations has evolved over the <br />years from an authoritative, top-down style to a <br />highly participative style that actively involves <br />plant. operators. <br />During plant start-up and the first three years of <br />operation, most decisions and guidelines were made <br />by the process control manager. In the first year of <br />operation, the manager began delegating more <br />responsibility to the shift supervisors. As supervi- <br />sors andoperatorsbecame morefamiliarwithplant <br />operation, they were assigned additional responsi- <br />bilitiesand decision making. <br />By the third year of operation, the process control <br />manager was spending less time on process control <br />and more time on general managerial and admin- <br />istrative functions. This was one factor in the <br />change from process control manager to plant <br />manager. <br />During the fourth year, supervisors worked with <br />crews to develop process control guidelines. Pro- <br />cess control was divided into two areas: primary <br />and secondary treatment. Process control of the <br />primary and secondary areas was rotated among <br />the supervisors and their crews for four-week <br />periods. <br />In the fifth year of operation, some changes were <br />made to improve communication and participa- <br />tion in process control. Rotating responsibility <br />every four weeks among four crews left people out <br />of the process control discussion for twelve weeks <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.