[139713] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 365x24x7
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Young)
Sun Apr 17 14:18:21 2011
In-Reply-To: <20110417161829.31826.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: Michael Young <michael@mwyoung.ca>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 14:17:25 -0400
To: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Having run 24/7 NOC, customer care and tier 3 engineering/dev support, for 2=
0 years, my two cents are:
1) You need to rotate shifts and have overlap between shifts for training an=
d communication purposes
2) Always rotate forward, due sleep cycles
3) If you want to retain staff and not burn them out, do not rotate more tha=
n one a month, I've tried from 2 week to 12 week rotations. Longer rotations=
mean more staff, when you try various shift schedules you will see why, but=
they work best. You make your cost on the extra staff by lowering turnover w=
hich is expensive to deal with.
4) Take your staff opinions in on schedule but you make the call, someone wi=
ll always dislike the schedule no matter how hard you try,.......
5) make sure you support shift swapping within reason, so people can deal wi=
th personal schedule conflicts
Good luck!
Michael Young
M:647-289-1220
On 2011-04-17, at 12:18, "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>> Some people claimed they'd have preferred it if we'd changed to the=20
>> _following_ shift rater than the preceding shift each week but never=20
>> having tried that I don't know how it would be.
>=20
> I've read stuff that confirms that changing to a later shift is much
> easier than changing to an earlier one. It certainly matches my
> experience that the jet lag flying to Europe, where I have to get up
> six hours earlier, is much worse than flying back.
>=20
> It also makes the obvious point that fewer shift changes are easier on
> the employees than more.
>=20
> R's,
> John
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
