When Maeve Pendergast, CC ’10, tried to request more toilet paper from Columbia University Facilities, she was told it was an “urgent request” and she should call the maintenance help line, 212-854-2779 (212-85-HAPPY). When she called, the worker on the other end of the line agreed it was urgent, but that she needed to file the problem as a non-urgent one and explain the urgency of the situation in the Comments section of the form.
Pendergast’s confusing experience isn’t atypical. Almost all Columbia students must deal with Facilities at one point during their four years here. While the online maintenance form can be confusing, determining the ins and outs of the Facilities infrastructure—or even which individual would be best to talk to regarding a given problem—is even more difficult.
With five supervisors, one for each maintenance category—plumbing and locks, electrical and re-lamping, carpentry, paint and masonry, and custodial issues—and 20 or so workers in each shop, knowing who to talk to can be problematic.
Each supervisor oversees one maintenance “shop” and is responsible for scheduling, ordering supplies, and training the workers in the shop. When a non-emergency maintenance request is received, the relevant supervisor is responsible for ordering parts, if necessary, and determining which Facilities worker is available to do the job.
Most confusion among students seems to lie in determining the line between urgent and non-urgent requests. In Pendergast’s case, though her request was considered urgent, she had to file a non-urgent report because “[they] can’t do anything about it unless there’s a work ticket,” which only gets filed with non-urgent requests.
Wait times can be even more disheartening for students. Despite the issue, Pendergast found a plastic bag of toilet paper in her room the next afternoon—what she regarded as a surprisingly quick turnaround. According to Renee Walker, assistant director of communications, the average response time to non-urgent maintenance requests—once all necessary parts and information are received—is three days. Walker said the possible causes of a maximum 14-day wait would be because of “awaiting parts” or “investigation ... to the root cause of the problem,” for instance to determine whether the problem is localized or building-wide.
The disconnect between maintenance and the Hospitality Desk can be a further point of frustration when seeking a repair. Explained on their own Web site as a student’s “‘one-stop shop’ for all your Housing needs,” the Hospitality Desk does not directly handle maintenance issues. This disconnect can cause confusion for students seeking to understand maintenance procedures and policy.
Some students have found success in getting their requests answered by eschewing the maintenance request system completely in favor of direct contact. Stephen Hancock, CC ’11, arrived at his Broadway room at the beginning of the semester to find that the door’s dead bolt was misaligned and the door couldn’t be locked. He and his roommate bypassed the system by e-mailing a Facilities employee directly.
Despite many student complaints, Walker said Facilities was working on some improvements. She referred specifically to management’s monthly meetings with Resident Assistants as a forum to discuss any student concerns.
According to Walker, greater accessibility and their work with students is translating into progress. Walker attributed the “2,150 work requests a week” that Facilities fields—an increase from the 1,900 requests the department was receiving a year ago—to “better communication and ease of submitting work orders.”