eddie stan cody Staffing and On-Call Decisions - Transcript Notes

Staffing and On-Call Planning

• Anthony on-call scheduling is uncertain; discussion mentions a projected window ("fifteen months" as a point of reference) and the idea of placing him on a schedule for potential on-call needs, but with caveats due to quota jobs and the requirement that someone with a van be available to run the job.
• Core requirement: a minimum crew of two technicians per call/job. The team consensus is that it cannot be a one-person job or pairings that leave a critical skill gap.
• Proposal: establish a couple of tech teams as basic runners to handle the bulk of quoted jobs, which are expected to be two-, three-, or four-person calls, plus additional team members as needed. This aims to keep the larger jobs covered and avoid leaving anyone idle when emergencies arise.
• Decision point: two guys minimum is favored; if TD is hiring, two-person minimum is preferred. Cautions about pairing: avoid a situation where one is an apprentice and the other is an experienced tech; the pairing should balance experience and capability.
• Apprenticeship considerations: the apprentice route is appealing but complicates mobility, as apprentices often do not have vans and rely on being met at the shop or having a more local setup. Personal geography matters (e.g., someone living farther away adds travel time and logistics complexity).
• Current techs and routes: Chris has been handling a lot of North Side jobs and prefers not to commute back down and then back up; Shane is geographically closer for Anthony’s needs. There is discussion about using a dedicated tech who is closer to home to reduce excessive driving for Chris.
• Vehicle and scheduling logistics for pairing:
  • If Anthony is paired with someone who lives far away, consider vehicle-based mobility to reduce time spent meeting up or waiting for rides.
  • A potential cost/benefit question raised: should Chris be paid for driving ~20 minutes to North from the shop if he’s transporting Anthony? The team notes there is currently no mileage reimbursement for driving a personal vehicle.
  • The idea of assigning a dedicated driver to Anthony or adjusting the route to minimize unnecessary driving is discussed, with emphasis on reducing friction and time lost in pickups and drop-offs.
• Anthony’s vehicle status and probation:
  • During the probation period, there is hesitation to place someone in a work vehicle (truck) until proven; if they prove themselves, moving to a truck is more feasible.
  • The consensus: place Anthony in a truck after probation to increase mobility and avoid hindering other techs who may need to meet him or pick him up at the shop.
• On-call behavior and real-world examples:
  • An example discussed: Anthony volunteered to help with a two-and-a-half inch burst on the ground, illustrating scenarios where more mobility and responsiveness matter.
  • Logistics example: if Anthony is meeting someone at the shop or en route, there are scenarios where he might be picked up, dropped off, or meet at the job site; the team weighs which approach minimizes travel time and time wasted.
• Hiring considerations and hours review:
  • The group contemplates bringing on a couple more guys but wants to see consistent hours first (at least two to three weeks of stable hours across the team).
  • Some jobs (two retrofit/resident jobs) are ready to go but require sufficient manpower; potential to split into two-person calls to evaluate feasibility of hiring a new apprentice and running a two-person truck.
  • Action item: evaluate hours across the crew for stability; consider leveraging additional manpower only after hours are consistently solid for multiple weeks.
• Timekeeping and accountability:
  • A plan to document hours on timesheets for visibility (e.g., noting that a specific worker had 29 hours due to a particular job). This helps justify staffing changes and cross-training opportunities.
• Interdepartmental/HR coordination:
  • Discussion of Madison and PFAC paperwork; HR is involved, and there’s a note that HR should be contacted if needed. There is an emphasis on letting HR manage updates and inquiries, given that some details (e.g., current status) may be unclear.
• Collaboration and mentorship:
  • Anthony’s growth is aided by pairing with Shane, who is described as a teacher and good communicator. Anthony is seen as benefiting from hands-on coaching and real-time feedback.
• Closing reflection:
  • The team emphasizes the value of focusing on hours and staffing realism before expanding headcount. They want to ensure that new hires or apprentices have a clear path to vehicle assignment after proving themselves.

Vehicle policy, mobility, and mileage considerations

• Probation vs. full vehicle assignment:
  • Avoid putting someone in a truck during probation unless they prove themselves; post-probation, moving to a truck is favorable to increase mobility.
• Apprentices and van access:
  • Apprentices without a van would be met at the shop; proximity and distance matter for who they ride with and how they travel to jobs.
• Mileage reimbursement:
  • Current stance: there is no mileage reimbursement for personal vehicles used for work; this impacts the discussion about who should bear travel costs and how to compensate for driving time.
• Anthony’s driving and route considerations:
  • Concerns about driving to North Scottsdale/North Phoenix; discussion includes practical examples of on-call driving, such as meeting at the shop versus meeting at a client site, and the impact on overall efficiency.
• Logistics when pairing with other techs:
  • If Anthony is paired with a tech that's farther away, the team weighs the benefits of minimizing drive time versus the need for Anthony to gain experience with multiple teammates.
• Real-world example and decision influence:
  • The idea that moving Anthony into a truck after probation could reduce the requirement for others to drive out of their way and help him be more autonomous on job sites.

Hours, scheduling, and hiring considerations

• Hours review before expansion:
  • There is strong emphasis on having consistent hours for two to three weeks before adding new hires, to ensure workload balance and avoid over-extending the team.
• Current workload and upcoming jobs:
  • Two retrofit/resistance (res) jobs and a Shane project are noted as imminent; there is concern about how to allocate manpower across these jobs.
• Two-man crew strategy:
  • The group discusses the possibility of two-person calls for many of the quoted jobs, supporting a plan to hire an apprentice and operate a two-person truck when feasible.
• Timekeeping and transparency:
  • Documenting hours on time sheets (e.g., a worker with 29 hours due to a specific issue) to maintain transparency and support staffing decisions.
• Employee monitoring and communications:
  • Discussion of Bill and Josh regarding hours and communication; the team recognizes that some staff may not be consistently communicating their hours and needs follow-up to ensure alignment.
• Madison and HR status:
  • Madison’s status and PFAC paperwork are addressed; HR is handling updates, with the office team ready to pass along information when available.
• Customer quotes and timing considerations:
  • Quotes have been sitting for a while, with customers asking when work will occur; many quotes could potentially be addressed by a two-person crew, enabling more efficient scheduling and possibly hiring a new apprentice.

Apprenticeship onboarding, expectations, and culture

• Interview expectations and onboarding gaps:
  • There is reflection on the onboarding process; the team acknowledges they may not have fully explained to prospective apprentices what to expect (e.g., needing to come to the office, ride with someone, etc.).
• Office meetings vs. field realities:
  • Apprentices may be used to coming to the office, but job realities sometimes require them to travel with another tech or meet at the shop before going to the job site.
• Vehicle expectations for apprentices:
  • The policy is to avoid placing apprentices in a vehicle until they have proven themselves and earned the trust to be mobile.
• Anthony’s unique situation and benefits of mobility:
  • Anthony is seen as a strong performer overall, and the team supports putting him in a truck after probation to maximize his mobility and development opportunities.

Performance criteria: Exceptional rating (ER) and coaching

• What constitutes an Exceptional rating:
  • ER is earned by exceeding every goal listed in the performance plan, including driving metrics, safety, job knowledge, and overall performance. Attitude and teamwork are included as evaluation criteria.
• Criteria specifics:
  • Safety performance, job knowledge, driving behavior, and overall performance must exceed expectations to qualify as exceptional.
• Driving performance:
  • A key component; for example, Eddie’s driving is discussed, with a reference to a high performance metric (e.g., $96\%$) for the year, highlighting strong on-road safety and efficiency.
• Eddie’s project example (Gram Lab):
  • Gram Lab involved a challenging sequence: getting a lift down a parking garage on an incline, coordinating with Chuck to obtain auto ramps, and delivering the job on time. This is cited as an example of performance, leadership, and problem-solving contributing to an exceptional assessment.
• Attitude and leadership:
  • Attitude is part of the ER evaluation. There’s an acknowledgment that Anthony’s attitude has improved and that CJ/Ted TD interactions may have previously affected him. Positive attitude and initiative are valued as indicators of potential exceptional performance.
• Peer and customer demand:
  • Senior technicians requesting Eddie to handle certain jobs reflects customer trust and technician reputation, which supports ER potential when performance aligns with customer needs and deadlines.
• Coaching and continuous improvement:
  • The discussion emphasizes ongoing coaching, mentorship (Shane as a teacher), and the importance of maintaining professional behavior and collaboration to achieve exceptional status.
• Summary stance on ER:
  • Exceptional status is achievable for high performers who consistently exceed goals across safety, performance, knowledge, driving, and attitude; it’s a high bar but attainable with demonstrated results and professional conduct.

Mentorship, teamwork, and culture

• Pairing and teaching dynamics:
  • Shane is valued as a mentor who explains concepts and shares knowledge, which benefits Anthony and other junior techs. The team believes pairing junior techs with experienced mentors accelerates learning and job quality.
• Attitude and personal development:
  • There is emphasis on improving attitude to unlock exceptional potential; the team notes observable improvements and highlights the importance of maintaining a positive, proactive approach on jobs.
• Customer-facing impact:
  • The attitude and initiative of junior techs influence customer perception and subsequent job requests; positive experiences with Anthony and Eddie drive future opportunities and client trust.
• Final energy and gratitude:
  • The session ends with appreciation for contributions and a sense of closing that reflects a collaborative, forward-looking plan.

Practical takeaways and next steps

• Confirm two-man minimum policy for all new hires and apprentices once mobility is proven, with a plan to assign trucks after probation.
• Formalize the mileage policy (currently no reimbursement for driving personal vehicles) and evaluate whether any exceptions are warranted for specific cases.
• Implement a structured hours review cycle (minimum 2–3 weeks of consistent hours) before adding new hires; use timesheets to document and justify staffing decisions.
• Maintain clear onboarding expectations for apprentices (office visit, ride-along requirements, travel expectations) to avoid misalignment.
• Use Anthony’s mentorship with Shane and Chris’s experience with North Side jobs to structure future pairings, prioritizing proximity and efficiency.
• Track ER criteria and development plans for junior techs, aiming to recognize and cultivate high performers (driving, safety, knowledge, attitude).
• Coordinate with HR (PFACs, Madison, and other stakeholders) to ensure alignment on employment status, paperwork, and on-call scheduling changes.
• Continue to monitor job flow and quotes marination; consider splitting larger quotes into two-person calls to optimize scheduling and determine whether to hire an apprentice.
• Document concrete examples of success (e.g., specific jobs like Gram Lab) to illustrate performance and reinforce best practices.
• Schedule a follow-up discussion to finalize the staffing plan, confirm two-person minimums, and establish a clear path for Anthony and other potential apprentices.