Recent changes in "quality control" have produced some new procedures for dispatcher ratings/reviews. Coming from a company where a lot of what we did was monitored for revenue purposes, I wasn't a stranger to someone listening in and wasn't phased by the extra ear on the line.
Our supervisors are essentially restricted from assisting on the radio or phones unless we are slammed, which begs the question, how can you adequately and correctly rate performance when you are no longer equipped to do the job and are out of practice?
Shouldn't the supervisor rating you know how to do the job? Know how to run the radio system? Know how to correctly and succinctly enter call information, be it emergency or delayed reports. While no one expects the perfection and speed of a veteran dispatcher, there should be a certain level of competency.
No one disagrees that there has to be a certain degree of separation between levels for reasons of impartiality and enforcing discipline when clear violations of policy occur.
While so much of what we do is set in stone, i.e., number of units per type of call, send or phone call, code 3, etc., when the situation is unique, how is a write up determined? Are we working on the whim of the supervisor and what if there is any existing personal bias. One supervisor may disagree with what was your course of action and handle it one way where another may find little or no fault and simply pass on a few words of advice.
Lets say there was a revolt and the whole room got up and walked out (an almost non-existent chance this would happen but for shits and giggles lets say it did). What would happen to the city, the citizens, the calls entered and retained in the CAD system?
As you 'monitor" me and add it to my running file and possibly put a negative mark in there, should I be confident in knowing that you're being accurate if you don't know how to do the job yourself anymore?
3 hours ago