In order to make it easier to justify staffing levels, we’d like to see a report that would make a recommendation based off our fleet data (counts, classes, direct hours, etc.)
NAFA Has a great Staffing Guide to work from.
Yep, that’s exactly what I was thinking about using!
I think that this will be a great idea. Old staffing models seem to be off with all the changing times. I am not sure how NAFA does their staffing model but I eagerly await the information for RTA’s version. WA State Transit Association came up with one that works well with larger shops but doesn’t work as well on smaller shops. The challenge for a smaller shops is trying to figure out where they want or need to be with their program.
For example, one shop that I visit takes their wheels and drums off every PM to inspect the brake system. Roughly 4 hours to do this completely.
Another shop looks into the brake area with a flash light and performs their best visual inspection. Roughly 10 minutes.
The time difference between the two is about 4 hours. If I wanted to adopt the long form of a brake system inspection into my PM, how do I justify that with staffing guide?
Another example might be that a shop is short staff and have been short cutting non essential maintenance so that they can keep enough vehicles on the road. How do you use statistics to show where your staffing levels should be?
Not having data to back your request for increasing staff is an uphill battle. When maintenance isn’t failing in their mission, its hard to justify more staff. When morale goes down due to consistently high workload, how does that factor in the data? I believe Preventative Maintenance isn’t for just equipment, its for people as well.
More questions then answers here but when times are changing, companies are changing, people are changing, technology changes, thoughts and ideas must change to provide new solutions. I hope that this causes some discussion and aids in the new staffing model.