cwiz
Full Member
Posts: 350
|
Post by cwiz on Jul 2, 2007 8:49:17 GMT -5
gee from my understanding isn't she the only one that has volunteered to work with us at our level and to see what is truly going on inside
I would like to see more pay and better benefits but look around there is only maybe less then half of the employees that actually work the compound and hold the whole shift together while the others just show up and sit around and bulls**t, and lucky if you can get them to count right that day or even count at all
|
|
|
Post by calculus on Jul 2, 2007 8:58:37 GMT -5
I was pointing out that it was July 1, and no resignation announcement.
---
Part of Bedard's appeal is that she admits that she doesn't know everything about the job, and to be honest, there really isn't much the Secretary has to say about the day to day operations of the department. There are hundreds of people who do policy development, personel management, and a ton of other stuff that is neatly packaged and hand delivered to the secretary for a signature. The biggest difference that I have seen first hand with Bedard is that she wants to know why the policy was developed in that way, then once it is in place, she maintains contact with the line staff to find out if the policy is workable or not. To an extent Harry K. was this way.
I guess you can say it is a matter of management technique, you have the "Old School" method that was put in place when Michael Moore brought his "Top to bottom" plan in where he told you what to do and if you didn't like it, Walmart was hiring, vs a "Bi-directional" model that solicits feedback to the line staff and actually listen to the suggestions.
Bedard's intellect and desire to know everything about her job, combined with her experiences as a professor and mentor, make her much better suited for the Secretary spot in contrast to "McD's" Military model that he has been trying to force down the department's throat.
Cal.
|
|
rwfc
Full Member
"Love the family, hate the politics"
Posts: 365
|
Post by rwfc on Jul 2, 2007 10:05:19 GMT -5
True about Dr. Bedard, but I personally want someone in the spot that has years of security experience and actually knows what it is like to work at and run an institution. I'm actually in favor of Dugger, or a couple of our Region Directors. I just think someone who has come up thru the ranks with us will be more apt to look at issues from our perspective. Trust me--I am not a fan of Crosby, but if you look past the criminal crap, didn't you feel like he wanted good things for security? Like he understood where the "little folk" were coming from? (I'll get slammed for that comment I'm sure!) Have a good day-and be kind.
|
|
|
Post by screwielewie on Jul 2, 2007 10:25:10 GMT -5
gee from my understanding isn't she the only one that has volunteered to work with us at our level and to see what is truly going on inside I would like to see more pay and better benefits but look around there is only maybe less then half of the employees that actually work the compound and hold the whole shift together while the others just show up and sit around and bulls**t, and lucky if you can get them to count right that day or even count at all You have this correct. I suspect that if she was in the top position she would fight for raises and such. You are also correct in your assessment of the staff as well. A few hard chargers a lot of middle level and a few just lazy slackers. As long as we have Senate President's and House Speakers that do this off the cuff (Budget Cuts and no raises) the leadership of DOC, The Governor and the PBA are all just spectators. The state is really run by The Speaker of the House and the Senate President....
|
|
|
Post by knuckledragger on Jul 2, 2007 16:25:28 GMT -5
I think most of you all missed my point. That's my fault. What my point is, is what is her CONVICT SENSE? Does she know when one is running a game? If so, does she basically tell them to f*ck off? Does she get on you about cussing one out who cussed you? Does she understand that being professional is o.k., but yet we do NOT deal with professionals? What are her stances on dealing with problem children? Is she sympathetic or even empathetic to their "plight"? Does she want every stupid a*s request or grievance responded to, even if it's pure bulls*hit? You're right, I do not know her. That's why I asked what makes her better. Does she speak her mind over stupid policies? DOES SHE EVEN KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH INMATES? This is why I consider her a book worm. Having an education is fine and dandy, but one has to have a bit of street smarts too. One has to have actually done the job in order to understand. And I don't mean at an administrative level. Cleaning up staff is fine and dandy too. But how does she deal with inmates? That is the question.
|
|
|
Post by jester321 on Jul 2, 2007 19:54:16 GMT -5
As secretary of the department she shouldn't have too.
She is a smart capable lady with class.
But to answer your inquiry she is polite listens then refers most inmates to the proper person to answer their grievance.
The question I have is will she fight for security?
Is she really for us to get a raise, or would she rather have the money for inmate program.
Which we do need to expand.
I wonder if inviting Richard Dugger, or another former leader back would we see the changes, (for the better) in either policies or personal
Anyone ever see an inmate run up to Harry K. and say "Hey man yous need to fixity this." (Don't get mad that was humor)
Besides my test is IF a leader can put up with me inmates are easy.
And Dr. B. and I got along fine.
|
|
BKCISGT
Junior Member
Polititians aren't useless they're great for target practice!
Posts: 75
|
Post by BKCISGT on Jul 2, 2007 23:00:54 GMT -5
Knuckledragger! I have one thing to say about both of your post ! [size=2]AMEN![/size][/b] I get your point We need someone up there that realizes that stupid policies not only shoot the hell out of morale. But make it hard and dangerous for those of us in the trenches working our a$$es of trying to make them work! We need someone from the dept, has come up through the ranks & has just a little bit of COMMON SENSE! Unfortunately, It seems that this is too much to ask for!
|
|
|
Post by LockInaSock on Jul 3, 2007 1:18:40 GMT -5
Hey Kunckledragger, I want to say first off that I like the avatar as well as the signature. Unfortunately, I believe that it is somewhat insulting to the caveman. You see the caveman had to be adept at survival, which is dependent upon common sense, something that has been totally devoid in the dept. since, ohhh, I would say that since Moore settled the Osterback lawsuit in an out of court settlement. Since then and within the last couple of years of course, the amount of paperwork has increased in direct proportion to the catering to the inmates. Perhaps you should instead put an avatar of McDumbnuts on your posts with the signature of "So easy that a convict -loving -no-experienced-idiot can do it".
|
|
|
Post by knuckledragger on Jul 3, 2007 4:40:00 GMT -5
That's a good idea! But I couldn't steal your idea like that. I'd feel guilty.
|
|
bobsr
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by bobsr on Jul 3, 2007 19:20:25 GMT -5
BKCISGT
the problem with common sense is it is uncommon!
|
|
|
Post by sumpin4u2no on Jul 15, 2007 16:47:24 GMT -5
The problem is that you have stupid people that didn't follow the policies as they were before the stupid policies were put in place - that's why the 'stupid policies' are there now. As for the comments about answering stupid grievances and requests - the courts recognized our procedures and certified them years ago - this keeps us out of court a lot more than you can ever imagine - so yes, that's why we have to answer even the stupid ones and the one's that are BS.
One thing that I have noticed while on this board for the past year or so, is that everyone has legitimate gripes and complaints and that these things affect morale - but yet the majority of the time there are reasons that policies are put into place because of directives from much higher than just the DOC level - and very, very few of the people that post on here actually attempt to find out why they are required to perform these "stupid things". I think everyone would benefit by not just assuming that a decision or directive given to you by your chief, captain or lieutenant was a brain fart by someone.
As for Osterback, I agree that it is ridiculous the things that we are required to do - but there again - this is what the courts required that we do - not Micheal Moore/Jimmy Crosby/McDonough. Someone made the comment earlier that they wanted a Secretary that would stand up to the leadership of the government in order to get us raises, better benefits, etc. - guess what? - that person wants a job too. It would be like you going to your Warden and saying give me a raise or I'll quit....guess where your next check will come from - the unemployment line. The way you get raises is to vote someone into your senate and house seats that will vote for you a raise and better benefits.
|
|
|
Post by sfcwoodret on Dec 17, 2012 9:47:39 GMT -5
Gov. Rick Scott’s search for another Florida Department of Corrections secretary ended with an internal candidate, his office confirmed on Sunday.
DOC Deputy Secretary Michael Crews will become the third secretary under the Scott administration, replacing Secretary Ken Tucker, who was scheduled to retire on Dec. 28.
Scott plucked Tucker from his position at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to replace Indiana transplant Ed Buss, who resigned in August 2011 amid disagreements with legislative leaders over his approach to privatization.
The turnover at corrections is not unique to Scott. Crews’ appointment is the sixth in six years for the department that’s been hit by scandal and controversy. Former Secretary James Crosby, for instance, was sentenced to eight years in federal prison in a 2007 plea deal involving kickbacks from a prison contractor.
An official announcement of Crews’ promotion will be made on Monday, according to Melissa Sellers, a governor’s office spokeswoman.
|
|
|
Post by sfcwoodret on Dec 18, 2012 8:21:29 GMT -5
Michael Crews spent his first official day as secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections explaining how he planned to bail his department out of a $62 million budget deficit.
DOC already placed a hiring freeze on non-critical positions and renegotiated vendor contracts, but that may not be enough. More of the department’s 2,800 open positions could be slashed, Crews said.
“We’re figuring out a plan that could result in position losses,” he said. “It’s not that we don’t have the positions; we don’t have the money to fill the positions.”
|
|
|
Post by whiteE on Dec 18, 2012 10:43:28 GMT -5
Here's an idea let's make prison's, prison's again. Balanced approach to house an inmate say from over 45-50 dollars a day to 20-25 dollars a day. I mean if were going to cut positions we need to cut programs and inmate entitlements. After all critical compliments were not designed to run institutions as common practice. Officer safety is already an issue, not to mention at critical compliment Officer's cannot conduct their duties as described in policy and procedure directives without technically violating them, in some form if truth be told. Just a suggestion!!
|
|