[BC] How A Station Can Stay Afloat...

[Cowboy]

On Friday 30 March 2007 09:40 am, Gary Peterson wrote:
> " There are several rules that affect station staffing. They are:...
> Harold "
> 
> Unless it was deleted when I wasn't looking, there *was* a requirement that
> the designated chief operator of a directional AM be an employee, rather
> than a contractor. 

 73.1870
 I *was* the CO for which that rule was clarified, eons ago.

>   I don't recall that the rule
> required the DCO to be a full-time employee...just that the DCO was an
> employee, rather than a contract engineer.

 There's no requirement that the DCO be an engineer !
 That wasn't the point. It was about enforceable authority, and the ability
 to fire other employees. 

 At the time, before the attack of the lawyer hoards, there were reasonable
 folks at the Commish.
 It was felt that an actual employee could have authority over other employees,
 while a contractor could not have immediate personal authority over employees.
 "YOU'RE not the boss of me ! YOU can't fire me !" mentality.
 Since the designation of "Chief" operator was intended to be the operator
 ( among many ) that was chiefly responsible for technical compliance, the
 Commish wanted that person to have unquestionable legal authority to actually
 enforce station policy.
 It was not felt that the Chief needed to be full time to be liable, or to carry
 authority, but it was felt that he/she at least needed to be on the employee payroll.
 At that time, the DCO could be personally held liable for violations as well, so
 it made sense.
 It wasn't believed that the Chief needed to personally be an engineer to make
 certain engineering got done. He could hire, and fire an engineer as necessary.

 The times, they are a-changin.

-- 
Cowboy