• anon

    The PO can take better care of its facilities by supporting the staff who care for the facility. When a new program (TL-5) rolls out actually get behind it and the new system/product and the people performing the duties. Not the "we all buy in" junk we actually got when it rolled out, but really buy into it -- or not and scrap it. No issue in admitting if it was a mistake and going back to a different system. The issue is that we were told we had buy in from all levels of management, it rolled out, and we got no backing, no buy in, and our locals basically said yeah, "whatever, we are gonna do what we want to, the people at national aren't the ones who have to be in this building"... so, what good is it to say your custodians are to be treated as professionals and have a new fancy program to follow if: 1.) custodians are still just "the janitor" -- that trash on the floor is your job security; 2) no one actually follows the fancy program (from top to bottom) -- if there is a custodian trying to follow it, they get ridiculed and labeled "difficult" for it; 3.) training, training, training!!! we were promised additional monthly recurring training -- didn't (still doesn't) happen!!! (heck we don't even get our OSHA required yearly training refreshers -- and even if we did, they aren't followed). The new hire custodian training -- being told to do things that are against the TL-5 program or that the products don't really work, or that they (the trainer or site champion) can't do anything about the training facility not using the correct equipment/products because of "how clean it looks". Literally at every echelon the implementation of this "new" TL-5 system has failed. It was doomed from the start because there was no REAL buy in by upper, middle, lower or local management as well as the custodians. So, what you have are either facilities staffed for TL-5, but still doing TL-3 workload (4 custodians doing what use to take 6 custodians) or you have facilities who are running understaffed and having to prioritize the workload based on health and safety -- not appearance. And lets not forget all the additional cleaning time for COVID that was or wasn't added to the staffing packages -- if they were even correctly account for at all.

    Aug 31, 2022
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.