Reasons for rejecting The CNFO OP1 CONTRACT PDMS performance plan.
The unions are in dispute with Telkom & see our group list below of matter that must be addressed.
For the record,as a group we have only received our contacts on28/08/2012
- How did they get to 60 min. clearing time on all faults, activations, routines and recoveries?
- Why does the analysers and dispatch, not have a time frame to act on an incident, but we have to?If the “60 min. to clear” rule stays, no more bulk orders will be entertained.
Facts not taken into account.
Testing a PRI, minimum requirement for testing after repairs is 20 min
Five Pair given my divert control is not guaranteed to be 100% correct There for testing done using a MTT tester takes up to 10 min per pair. That adds up to minimum time of 50 minutes.
Dispatched via Advantex on a fault. No record info given by Advantex. Must source own records on various platform. If no records available, must trace and update various platforms. In accurate record keeping by planning: Must trace between station, hobs this take longer than 30 min.
Optic fibre failures while out on the road attending to other faults, routine or activations: Tech must collect shared test equipment e.g. (OTTR, Trend, MTT, Max testers & more from the office.
Installation and commissioning cannot be done in 30 min if a soak test required is 48 hours.
ADSL ports flagged faulty, testing each port takes 5 min. Field techs have received up to 100 ports to test on one Advantex docket. This adds up to 8 hours of testing not 30 minutes as stated in the contract.
The availability of the NNOC staff to test equipment before a fault can be cleared. The NNOC could be busy with assisting other field techs and we have to wait. The time is out of our control.
In order to prove a fault various cards need to swap modules to localize faults as in the case of E10 OCB equipment e.g. SMX( To lcbr(locavour). This is the time frame the system takes run the test 30 minutes.
Refer to 24 at end of page.
With some systems a fault clearance procedure must be followed to localize a fault. This can take 2-3 hours. This means that RTS must be called out before the fault clearance procedure is completed?????
- 30 Min. Response time. What if there is more than one docket assigned to you?
- Where is travel time indicated on Advantex docket?
- How long before “60 min to clear” expires do we have to call RTS?
- Please explain 1.1.3. “Identify barriers and solutions. Submit daily tracking sheet indicating barriers per fault and submit to Ops Manager – daily feedback”. We forward our output barriers to our managers. Their solution, is forwarding an email and the job is done. No accountability from their side nor feedback in general there hands are chopped off.
- “Today Work Today”. What if a docket is dispatched 30 min before end of shift? Will it be allowed to complete docket on overtime how will we be affected for not attending to the fault because of travelling time and we are at the end of our shift?
- Why must RTS be called to assist with recoveries?
- Please explain how 6.1.7 affect technicians? “Advantex Technicians with no work <20% of WFM shift”. The NNOC is responsible to dispatch techs on daily bases. They are insufficient in analysing the network anddispatching accordingly .Why are we penalized on this contract if no work is dispatched to a tech in the field. Can the NNOC and Advantex guarantee a balance of weighting of the output plan objectives?
Why are only a specific group of technicians on Advantex? How are those technicians who are not on Advantex tracked and marked?( Inconsistencies).This is an unfair discrimination and in contradiction with section 9 the Bill of Rights of The Constitution. Everybody should be treated equal.
- In certain scenarios direct dispatching is required but we were told not to use.
(Management does not want us to use this feature because of the problem they experiencing on Advantex that is effects there stats.)It is a work around the system that does not work for our operation) .We been instructed by Management that we must wait for the Advantex docket to arrive on our name before attending. This can take from 5min to the following day for thedispatched docket to arrive on the field techs name. If the field tech continues without a docket, this in return will be recorded as idle time by management and being insufficient/ unproductive for that day. Again we are penalized for a system that does not work.
If a fault is detected, does the technician have to wait for the docket to arrive before attending to it? If no, will the technician still be covered by Telkom’s IOD policy and how would he be measured for being pro active? In many instances we know about the fault before we are dispatched. Can we be pro-active and respond, or unproductive and wait to be dispatched?
- What if a colleague needs assistance (not from RTS)? How do you get a docket to assist in a short as possible time? Note that the tech waiting for assistance and the stats will measure idle time against him and seen as been unproductive.
- Is Advantex implemented as a dispatching tool or as a tracking and monitoring tool?
Why are we subjected to a system that does not suite the CNFO environment?
The DC Power section was supposeto use Advantex, but because it does not suite their environment they done away with it.The Quality and assurance section is also not on Advantex for the same reason .Their work gets pulled of Servact ( Unibase) from the CNFO QA profile.
In order for Advantex to work in the CNFO environment, we must constantly manipulate it. This means that the stats calculated does not have integrity. Why are we then measured with a system that does not reflect true statistics?
- On this JD, whatrealisticcriteria’s will be used to determine if a technician exceeds?
For more than 12 years we are measured with a PDMS system that does not have clear objectives as what to do, or what is expected of us, to achieve a specific mark. We were told that with the most of our jobs, a maintenance tech can only achieve a MET.
- We want clear, practical, achievable objectives, to be able to achieve an EXCEED.
- Currently too many levels of markings. Should only be, NOT MET, MET and EXCEED. To keep it simple and efficient.
- The CNFO OP1 contract for Technical Officers is formulated on a level that that does not compare to other OP1 positions in Telkom. The requirements are much more complex and on a much more advanced level as e.g. an OP1 stock controller in the Procurement section.
The contract should be on the same level as other OP1 jobs in Telkom, as all the OP1’s are on the same salary structure, or alternatively we should be put on a different salary structure which acknowledge our more complex duties and our more advanced skills levels.
- Does the same set of rules apply to call-out duties when he is called out from home?
- How does it affect the technician on point 6.1.8, should his laptop go faulty?
What time span has been allocated for repairs? Certain software needed in field operations is not supported by IT and there for not supported by them. Delay is caused by limited licensing agreement between vendor and Telkomand this limits us in doing our work effectively.IT
- The JD, Contract & Realty, does not link in any way with each other.
- Direct instructions via email and not dispatched by Advantex from NNOC, managers. KOT & Supervisor. How will this be measured in the future?
This is done on a regular basis by managers because of the short falls within the NNOC and Advantex
- 3.3.1 Installation and commissioning is a build function.
It is not a maintenance function, there for weighting cannot be done. .For the record no installation and commissioning cannot be done in 30 min if a soak test required is 48 hours.
Summary
- For the field tech to adhere to the contract ,can Telkom guarantee the following:
Advantex full functional 100% and guarantee an amount of dispatching per day. We cannot be held responsible if no work was dispatch via Advantex.
A docket dispatched via Advantex will have all the record info attached with 100% accuracy.
Spares required will be available @ site on arrival.
The NNOC will run test on various systems and prove with 100% accuracy as to which site the field tech needs to go and do repairs.
Copper Spares on cable give by Divert Control will be 100% correct and will not require further testing.
Activations: All RTW will be 100% correct and will not need the field tech to intervene.
Removal of old equipment diverts & upgrades of equipment: NNOC will have 100% insight to all requirements and dispatch a field tech accordingly.
All field techs will have the software to access various equipmentsirrespective of limited licence agreements. E.g. Martis dongle and software.
New equipment installed in the field. All training will be done before new equipment is installed in the field.
Telkom, HR and supervisor will have a clear understanding as how to measure us in simple clear guidelines withoutbeen prejudice.
- Concussion: The JD, Contract & Realty, does not link in any way with each other. And where is C.H.A.R.T in this hole story.