STF

Personnel Department Report - May 2019

Posted June 10, 2019, 4:16 p.m. by Rear Admiral Daniel Lerner (Personnel Director, EGO) (Daniel Lerner)

Posted by Fleet Captain Adam W. (Former Ruler of the Club) in Personnel Department Report - May 2019

Posted by Rear Admiral Daniel Lerner (Personnel Director, EGO) in Personnel Department Report - May 2019
Personnel Department Report - April 2019

Important Note: May had an unusually low number of applications. I know not everyone reads through these reports in detail, so I wanted to make sure this was highlighted at the top of this report.

Placements overall

There were 4 applications processed in the month of May.

Academy vs Non-Academy
= Requests =
2 (50%) Academy
0 (0%) Main Fleet
2 (50%) Abramsverse

= Placements =
2 (50%) Academy
0 (0%) Main Fleet
2 (50%) Abramsverse
(Everyone was placed in the Academy who requested the Academy.)

Placement Statistics

= Posting Speed Requested=
0 (0%) Infrequent
0 (0%) Slow
1 (25%) Average
0 (0%) Regular
3 (75%) Frequent

=Posting speed placed=
4 (100%) Medium

Comments: All requests were Academy or Abramsverse, and we cannot offer higher-posted speeds for those requests (in fact, we have no available fast ships for new members anywhere in the club).

= How they found us =
Web search engines: 3
Referrals: 0
Did not say or provide details: 1

Departments
= First choice preferences for departments =
Engineering: 1 (25%)
Medical: 0 (0%)
Security: 0 (0%)
Science: 3 (75%)

= Department Placed in =
Engineering: 2 (50%)
Medical: 0 (0%)
Security: 0 (0%)
Science: 2 (50%)

Comments: One person had to be placed in their third-choice of departments due to having only one ship available for Abramsverse requests.

Processing Times

Average Processing Time: 9.7 hours
4 applications (100%) processed under 24 hours
0 applications (0%) processed between 24 and 48 hours
0 applications (0%) processed between 48 and 72 hours
0 applications (0%) processed over 72 hours

Member Tracking
(As of June 9, 2019)

=March 2019=

Academy placements: 2
Active: 1 (50%)
Rostered, but AWOL: 0
Never posted: 0
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 1 (50%)

Comments: Since last month’s report, one AWOL cadet who was still rostered is now no longer rostered..

Non-Academy placements: 2
Active: 2 (100%)
Rostered, but AWOL: 0
Never posted: 0
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 0

Comments: No changes since last month’s report.

Abramsverse placements: 2
Active: 0
Rostered, but AWOL: 0
Never posted: 0
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 2 (100%)

Comments: No change since last month’s report.

=April 2019=

Academy placements: 4
Active: 1 (25%)
Rostered, but AWOL: 2 (50%)
Never posted: 1 (25%)
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 0

Comments: No changes since last months’ report.

Non-Academy placements: 2
Active: 0
Rostered, but AWOL: 0
Never posted: 1 (50%)
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 1 (50%)

Comments: One AWOL JO who was still rostered is now no longer rostered.

Abramsverse placements: 1
Active: 0
Rostered, but AWOL: 0
Never posted: 1 (100%)
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 0

Comments: No changes since last month’s report.

=May 2019=

Academy placements: 2
Active: 0
Rostered, but AWOL: 0
Never posted: 2 (100%)
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 0

Non-Academy placements: 0

Abramsverse placements: 2
Active: 0
Rostered, but AWOL: 1 (50%)
Never posted: 1 (50%)
AWOL (and no longer rostered): 0

Open items from last report

MOTD: No new updates

Implementing PDept’s work into Exodus: No new updates.

“Unusual” referals to STF: There were no such referrals in May. If there are none in June, I will close this item (again).

Recommendations page: Pending TECH availability (may be delayed until next term).

New Member Resource Taskforce: emails from interested parties received; waiting on Academy for the joint process of deciding membership of the group

Placement policy review: This will most likely be an item for the second-half of the term.

Comments:

As I mentioned at the top of this report, May saw an unusual low number of applications. We had four applications: two for the Academy, two for the Chernov, and none for the rest of the club. Because we currently have bad retention stats, a low starting number of new members means we run into trouble right away. In the case of May, three of those new members have yet to post (it is now June 9th), and one is AWOL and unlikely to come back. That’s a problem… It is really outside of the Personnel Department’s role to do marketing, etc. I’ve done my best to bring the issue to the powers-that-be, and I hope it does not indicate a trend. I’ll provide an update in next month’s report.

The PDept staff has indicated some problems with our Academy placements. From our perspective, it appears we’re down to one Academy ship for placements, which could potentially lead to a problem at some point (in that respect, our unusual low number of applications meant we didn’t really have any placement challenges). Again, I’ve alerted the powers-that-be to the potential placement problem, and I’ll provide an update in my next months report.

Daniel Lerner, Personnel Director

Can you explain what it means that we currently have bad retention stats? To me that sounds like we had retention stats that were better at some point. Is that the case?

Adam W.

I’m only talking about our current situation, and am not comparing to any other time. From the membership tracking stats in this months report:

-March 2019: 6 new members placed by the PDept; three are still active as of June 9, 2019 (including two who were returning members but requested the PDept place them).

-April 2019: 7 new members placed by the PDept; one is still active as of June 9, 2019

-May 2019: 4 new members placed by the PDept; none are still active as of June 9, 2019.

(Some of those earlier numbers may have been skewed slightly more negative due to a recent re-emergence of the “Star Fleet Command” spam referral problem I have previously reported on. That was more of an impact, though, in October/November 2018 - January/February 2019 when it was first happening.)

So I wanted to ensure that the May 2019 drop in new applicants was on the radar. Maybe it is a statistical blip and maybe it is part of a new trend, but the powers-that-be need to be aware of it now. Low new membership applications combined with low retention numbers equals major problem for us.

Daniel


Posts on The Command Ship

In topic

Posted since


© 1991-2024 STF. Terms of Service

Version 1.15.9