 |
|
 |
|
| February 22, 2012 | |
Have a Suggestion for Improvements at CCWD?
Make it Here
The District's use of rubber buckets for back hoes Here's a spreadsheed of recent suggestions. |
|
|---|---|
| If your suggestion is related to safety, look here: |
 |
We all have ideas on ways to improve our workplace, but we don’t always know how to make our suggestions or whom we should talk to. Now it is easy to make a suggestion.
Just click here and it will be sent to the CCWD electronic suggestion box.
Your suggestion will be forwarded to the correct person, that person will respond, and both the suggestion and the response will be posted here on the employee website.
In addition to making a suggestion, you can use the website to view suggestions that are pending and check the progress of suggestions.
Here are recent suggestions made by employees and the responses.
Suggestion from Tracy Woodard:
A while back I read that the lake/ pond/ “reservoir” above the town of Port Costa was for sale. If this land still is for sale, the District could purchase it and use it for mitigation purposes for the expansion of LV. It already is a wetlands habitat and in a corridor for park land/ wild life preservation. It also would allow us the ability to drain the Treated Water Reservoir of Port Costa Reservoir into it without the need to request permission from a separate owner (dechlorination of the effluent is one thing, obtaining permission is another with a third party owner involved).
Response from Fran Garland:
Thank you for your suggestion of a wetland property near Port Costa that could potentially meet mitigation requirements for the Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion Project and provide benefits to District operations as well. The final mitigation package for the Expansion Project has already been submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game for approval. The properties included in the package were identified through an iterative process with these agencies that started in 2009. Guidelines and principles used in selecting the mitigation properties included maximizing the size of the parcels, linking key habitat areas, facilitating effective long-term management and optimizing for habitat quality or restoration potential. Over 90% of the mitigation requirement is for grassland habitat. Parcels were targeted that provided expansive grassland areas that could function as movement corridors for San Joaquin kit fox and other grassland species, and also had wetland features or other needed habitat types (e.g., scrub, oak woodland). Acquisition of additional wetland acreage is not now needed for the Expansion Project. However, if wetland mitigation needs arise on future District projects, the wetland property you have identified could be evaluated to see if it meets the mitigation requirements.
Suggestion from Tracy Woodard:
With the advent of “all weather flags”, Flag Etiquette allows for the display of the US flag during inclement weather. However, if the flag is flown at night, it needs to be "properly illuminated." The American Legion says on its web site regarding this point: "The American Legion interprets " proper illumination" as a light specifically placed to illuminate the flag (preferred) or having a light source sufficient to illuminate the flag so it is recognizable as such by the casual observer." I have noticed that some of the flag poles at the District are not illuminated at night. My suggestion is to ensure that the flood lights are properly functioning. Interesting enough, Flag Etiquette is codified: United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, §170 - §180
Response from Tracie Simpson:
Investigating this situation showed that lights were not working on one of the District’s flag poles. This is being resolved. Thank you, Tracy, for being alert and letting us know about this.
Suggestion from Stu Engle:
Has any thought been given to doing a classification study for maintenance clerical jobs? The Shannon Study was pulled off the table in the early 90s by the District after significant study by Local 1. Many of our classifications are nearly 30 years old now. Technology has passed us by. There has been recent activity (Qual Cards) related to job requirements, but it seems we should be discussing these classification issues outside regular contract negotiations, so we might have some agreed to changes to place on the table for future negotiations. It is too big an issue to bring to negotiations cold.
Response from Elia Bamberger:
There are no plans to conduct a classification study for maintenance clerical jobs. The District has not experienced any difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified staff for those positions, and our salary and benefits package is highly competitive with the job market. In response to the comments regarding technology and class specifications, when technology enhancements change the tools we use to conduct the work of a given classification, but not the nature of the classification itself, there is no requirement to update the job spec. For example, typing on typewriters versus a word processor/computer. The duty remains essentially the same – only the method for delivering the finished product has changed due to technology advancements. Lastly, the Local 39 MOU requires that any changes to a job spec be subject to a meet and agree negotiation process; at this time Local 39 has not requested the District to engage in such an effort.