Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />~ DEN HILLS <br /> <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />September 15, 2008 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />Mayor and City Council <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator f /; <br /> <br />Organizational Structure-Public Works Maintenance <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />Goals <br />The goals of the organizational structure of the Public Works maintenance function are as <br />follows: <br />. The organizational structure reflects and enables the accomplishment of Public Works <br />mailltenance goals and functions <br />. Encourages a cohesive, cross-trained work group <br />. Enables day-to-day operations to consistently function well <br /> <br />Options <br />There are two main options for organizing the Public Works Maintenance function <br /> <br />A. Public Works Superintendent managing and supervising the 8-person maintenance crew <br />B. Working foreman/foremen providing day-to-day work coordination and assignments for <br />the maintenance crew <br />The following is an analysis of the pros and cons of these two options. <br /> <br />Analysis <br />Option A <br />Pros: -- The PW Superintendent is a true supervisor, has supervisory authority, is <br />independent of the labor union, and has a management perspective <br />-- The PW Superintendent has an overall perspective to assist in determining <br />priorities re: Streets, Parks, etc. <br />-- The PW Superintendent has sufficient time to plan, organize, schedule, and <br />assign multiple daily projects for the 8-person crew. <br />--Public Works employees have the opportunity to take on the role ofproject <br />leader in the field. <br />--This structure matches the philosophy of a cohesive, cross-trained pool of Public <br />Works employees . <br />\\Metro-inet\ardenhills\Admin\City Administrator\General documents\RCA's\RCA PW maint org struct. 9-15-08.doc <br />