|
Posted by DLR on February 23, 2007, 1:55 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options guest wrote:
>> wrote:
>>
>>> f/fgeorge wrote:
>>>> Don't know where you are from but how can you plan for a Hurricane or
>>>> Tornado or shooting with 5 victims that will needs 5 dispatchers not
>>>> counting the ones that are handling the normal call load? ALL call
>>>> centers I have ever been to have been staffed exactly the same every
>>>> shift day in day out. Some days you have slack time, some days you
>>>> could use 30 more people.
>>> Workforce management software can do an incredible job of right-staffing a
>>> large call center. Combine it with good intraday management, and money
>>> doesn't have to be wasted by staffing the way you describe. It's 2007, not
>>> 1985. And with the public demanding better use of tax dollars, a call
>>> center that doesn't use workforce management software to reduce staffing
>>> costs is just another item on the list of ways that government can make
>>> better use of the money they already have.
>>>
>>> If all the call centers you've been in staff that way, I suggest you need
>>> to get out, and see more call centers. And the call centers you were in
>>> need new managers.
>>>
>>> Either way, it is irresponsible to suggest to anyone that they call 911
>>> just to test it. Even if it is a poorly managed call center that uses an
>>> outmoded staffing model that leads to excessively idle operators, you
>>> should not call 911 unless you have a real emergency.
>> Warren I see we are just going to have to disagree here. I worked in a
>> City that had over 100,000 people. I have been to areas that have over
>> 400 square miles, I have been to Cities that have well over a million
>> people, they ALL operated exactly the same way. Not a one had a plan
>> that put fewer dispatchers on duty during any percieved "slack time".
>> There were ALWAYS plans though to be able to "call back" more
>> dispatchers, if the problems overwhelmed the standard on duty shift.
>> And not a one had any problems with someone calling and saying "I am
>> testing my 911, can you tell me what it says on your screen?" Now not
>> all of those calls were handled immediately, sometimes the caller was
>> put on hold and then the dispatcher handled an emergency and then got
>> back to the person on the phone. I NEVER saw one dispatcher get angry
>> or mad at that type of call. I have seen PLENTY of dispatchers get mad
>> and angry and people that call and call and call over things that
>> should not be 911 calls. NO dispatcher ever let the Public know that
>> they were mad or angry though.
>> I have PERSONALLY made over a dozen of these types of call, and was
>> always helped in a very professional manner. I have found some
>> addresses that had problems, that were fixed by the phone company, and
>> most that were okay.
>> As I said you mileage may vary, but that is what I saw!
>>
> How about the public? If a real medical emergency happens & the person
> cannot get thru because of some "line testing calls to 911" and then
> the person either dies because the 911 was busy, the 911 operators wouldn't
> care since they wouldn't know what happened.
>
> The 911 line tester also wouldn't care since the person's death is not
> their concern nor would the 911-line-tester acknowledge they created
> problems.
I'm coming to this a bit late but 911 most likely works like other
T1/PRI circuits into the call center. One wire, multiple circuits. The
phone console queues up the calls. And unless it is very poorly designed
many many many calls can be queued before anyone gets a busy. And even
then I'd bet they roll over to somewhere else.
As to calling to verify 911, this is standard practice for many reason,
many of them by law. In NC you can't open a pool unless the inspector
calls 911 for an address check to show that someone calling 911 in a
panic who doesn't know the address of the pool can still get help. It's
expected by the 911 centers.
|