Highlights:
MLCA IDP Pilot for CG-1
Developed process for focus group to fully examine the Individual Deveopment Plan purpose, process, and forms; facilitated focus group of 15 MLCA members and employees during two-day offsite. Group outputs included recommendations to CG-1 for the CG IDP process and new IDP forms which will be used by MLCA/Main Street Tower during IDP pilot. (4 hours prep; 16 hours direct client work.)
Social Media
Provided feedback to CG-0931 on ALCOASTs concerning the use of blogs and wikis for consolidation as official feedback to CG-092.
Ongoing consulting and dialogue with Amver re/ their social media efforts in support of their mission. At suggestion of Amver client, registered for free social media conference to be held in late March; reserved GV so only direct cost will be lodging and MI&E.
Grievance concerning move of billet to Fifth District staff
On January 28th, I sent the following email (names redacted) to the Coast Guard representative on the leadership team of the AFGE Local 22:
I understand that you were involved in the OPCOM notifications yesterday. I wanted to alert you to my situation and ask that you take appropriate action in your role as the union representative.On March 2nd, I sent the following to the authorized representative of AFGE Council 120 for the purposes of all matters associated with Modernization:
My division chief did call me yesterday. But, he called to tell me that I wasn't being notified of my billet moves. He did tell me that billets that will be attached to D5 will be notified at a later date and that no one is losing a job or is being moved out of the local area. I note that he called me in order to provide what information he could, and, as I understand it, that his superiors had actually originally directed him not to provide me with any information at all.
As I read between the lines, then, my billet is slated to move to D5. I see that as a substantial change in my work conditions, a change which I am not satisfied with.
Since December 1996, I have been employed as a civilian employee with the Coast Guard as an organizational performance consultant (nee quality performance consultant). From 1996 through the summer of 2001, my billet was assigned to MLCA. That summer, the billet was administratively moved to LANTAREA, but my desk and role remained at MLCA. In my role as performance consultant for MLCA, my work spanned all of Atlantic Area, working with MLCA and other units across the Area and, often outside the Area. My span and impact was Coast Guard wide; the projects I worked on were often high-level initiatives. I was a member of, either directly or virtually, of the command staff at the MLCA, assigned to the deputy's staff.
This past summer, with a new division chief at the LANTAREA division to which I was administratively assigned, I was directed to move my desk from the MLCA at Main Street Tower in Norfolk to the division offices at the Portsmouth Federal Building. With this move, my work refocused away from supporting the MLCA, but remained initiatives with a Coast Guard wide focus.
While organizational performance consultants assigned to districts generally do the same sort of work, they are also generally restricted from working on Coast Guard wide projects, being directed to focus on district units within the district. Most organizational performance consultants assigned to districts are restricted in working with non-district units, thus reducing the span of their work. A district organizational performance consultant has a much different set of work conditions, a set of work conditions which are generally much more limiting in nature.
As a member of both the bargaining unit and the AFGE Local 22, I request that you engage management on my behalf. At this time, I am unwilling to accept a move to the Fifth District staff as it is a substantial change in my work conditions. Indeed, moving me with my colleagues to OC-09E would actually be a move which is more in keeping with both my span of work since I was hired with the Coast Guard and my organizational placement until last summer.
Management may argue that this move is made in order to staff the district to the same levels as the other districts (except the Eleventh District, which at this time also does not have two organizational performance consultants). I note that this argument is specious in that it ignores a huge swath of the Coast Guard -- the current MLCA and future DCMS -- which has NO organizational performance consultants providing support.
If you have any questions about my situation, please do not hesitate to contact me.
I have with this email provided courtesy copies to my direct supervisor, my second line supervisor, and representatives of the performance excellence program at CG-0931.
I look forward to hearing from you as you work this issue along with what I would think are a multitude of issues arising from the Coast Guard's modernization efforts.
A couple of things to add to the mix re/ my billet.OCIT Support
1. As you know, since my earlier email, I have been officially notified that my billet is slated to move to the Fifth District staff.
2. When the billet maps were created by the LANT/PAC/OPCOM/FORCECOM working group in Saint Louis, my billet was mapped to travel to OC-09E. Sometime after this working group, and with no transparency to the process, someone moved my billet to slide to D5. I believe a thorough examination of the facts surrounding the movement my billet must be completed. Who made the decision? Why was the decision not made with the transparency, and concurrence, of the Saint Louis working group? On what basis was the decision made? I would even go further and ask what billet decisions were made post-Saint Louis without transparent deliberations? Is this a singular incident, or is it just one example of changes made in the dark behind closed doors?
3. There's been some argument that the move to plus up D5 to have two organizational performance consultants is to create parity with the other districts. As I write this, there is a plan in D8 to delete one OPC billet, taking their PAL to one OPC. The parity argument is, frankly, factitious. I base this assertion on both the D8 example as well as the fact that DCMS, under modernization, ends up with exactly zero OPC support. Parity would take into account more than just the random number of two OPCs in a district, a number which is more accidental than based on any needs analysis.
4. There is a proposal working its way through the system to take all the OPC billets and have them work directly for CG-0931, the program manager, in as similar manner the current civilian personnel specialists are managed and the proposed DCMS program management model. If nothing else, my billet ought to be removed from any consideration of moving to D5 until the CG-0931 proposal has made its way through the complete process.
I've cc'd leadership of Am and CG-0931 on this email to keep them informed of my grievance with the proposed move of my billet to the Fifth District.
If I can help you during the bargaining process, please don't hesitate to let me know.
Drafted email to LCDR Derek S. and CDR Greg F. recommending that OCIT host a PFP workshop for the numbered staff team leads, or perhaps just the OCIT leadership, to work through the PFP for OPCOM... before the numbered staffs attempt to build their individual profiles. My recommendation is that Byron or Dave or George or I (or some combination thereof) facilitate this one-day workshop sometime later this month or in April.
No other OCIT support to report for this period.
Lean Six Sigma Summit
Byron would like to continue driving the LSS overarching program for the CG as movement from higher authority seems a bit slow at the moment and is proposing a LSS Summit cosponsored by the Leadership Development Center and Atlantic Area. Provided input to Byron on summit logistics and other summit issues. Recommended CG-0931 be one of the sponsors for this summit. Also recommended consider hosting at the LDC; this will minimize logistical issues as well as provide no cost participation by the LDC staff who are large stakeholders in this initiative. Byron has lead and is pursuing this initiative.
See also my recommendations, and solicitation for input and consensus building, for performance excellence qualifications, including LSS belts, at this Intelink-U page.
Individual Development Plan
Drafted IDP which includes activities for CY2009 and shorter & longer term professional goals.
Individual Development Plan For Peter Stinson Draft March 2008
View more documents from Peter Stinson.
Future look:
Participating in the examiner training for the Hamilton Award, next week, 9-13 March. TDY funding provided by TQC.
Summary for this reporting period
Hours Worked: 30.0
Billable hours/direct client work: 20.0
Leave hours: 12.0
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment