⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 9 findings
F1
Required experience and education requirements for some positions are too high, resulting in candidates with potential to be eliminated early in the process (e.g., Auditor/Controller office position requires both experience and a four-year degree in accounting).
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The PCCGJ recommends that the Auditor/Controller request a change to the Job Description for the Assistant Auditor/Controller position to allow experience to supersede the degree requirement. This is to take place no later than September 30, 2025. (F1)
F2
New or changes to Job Descriptions require approval by the BOS. The approval process is lengthy and entails several reviews and handoffs. The process must start in HR and can only be requested once a year (in January). This results in a delay of up to 12 months or more before otherwise qualified candidates can be considered for open positions (e.g., in Auditor/Controller's Office, Public Works Department, Sheriff's Department).
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The PCCGJ recommends that all applications are shared with the respective Hiring Manager and that the Hiring Manager is allowed to determine where experience can supersede a degree requirement. It is also recommended that the Hiring Manager update current job descriptions with 'experience supersedes the degree requirement' where applicable. This is to take place no later than October 31, 2025. (F2) In addition, it is recommended that 'Rule 9 Application Procedure' in the Personnel Rules document be updated as follows: 9.04 Disqualification of Applicants (2) Suggested wording change: The applicant fails to meet the minimum qualifications, except in cases where an applicant's experience supersedes a degree requirement.
F3
Reclassification of Job Descriptions follow the same path as above (Finding 2) and require labor intensive documentation and review.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The PCCGJ recommends that the BOS amend the Personnel Rules to allow more frequent changes to Job Descriptions. Changes in Job Descriptions should not require the extensive review and approval process as changes in Job Classification. It is recommended that approval for changes in Job Descriptions is limited to approval by HR and not the BOS. It is noted that this recommendation does not apply to job descriptions that include reclassification or when licensing/certification requirements change. The BOS will still review/approve those. This is to take place no later than October 31, 2025. (F3, F4)
F4
The process of filling vacated positions (e.g., Sheriff's Department) are hindered by the requirement of the department to go to the BOS to fill positions already allocated that are vacated regardless of the reason the position was vacated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The PCCGJ recommends that the BOS amend the Personnel Rules to allow more frequent changes to Job Descriptions. Changes in Job Descriptions should not require the extensive review and approval process as changes in Job Classification. It is recommended that approval for changes in Job Descriptions is limited to approval by HR and not the BOS. It is noted that this recommendation does not apply to job descriptions that include reclassification or when licensing/certification requirements change. The BOS will still review/approve those. This is to take place no later than October 31, 2025. (F3, F4)
F5
Department heads do not see applications that may meet the requirements of an open position but have been disqualified during the screening process in HR (e.g., Auditor/Controller Office, Public Works Department, Building Department, Sheriff's Department).
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The PCCGJ recommends that the BOS create a policy based on resolution of #SC 24-891, which will allow for succession planning, training and overlap in each department based on the discretion of the department head without additional BOS approval when upcoming vacancies are known. This is to take place no later than October 31, 2025. (F5)
F6
The Hiring Process does not include a succession plan, which would allow an overlap of incoming employees with those leaving (e.g., due to retirement) and would facilitate training and knowledge sharing (e.g., Public Works - Transportation Manager, Building Department - Building Inspector, Sheriff’s Department - IT Officer, Deputy Sargent, Dispatcher).
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The PCCGJ recommends that HR and the BOS place greater effort on recruitment for open Plumas County positions. This is to take place no later than October 31, 2025. (F6, F7) The following are suggested: Increase multimedia exposure for unfilled positions (e.g., county websites, job fairs, social media). Share all applications with the Hiring Manager (Recommendation 2) to increase the likelihood of filling positions with qualified internal candidates.
F7
Several positions in Plumas County have remained unfilled for months/years, resulting in increased workloads for fellow employees and/or the need to hire consultants (e.g., Auditor/Controller Office, Public Works Department, Sheriff’s Department).
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The PCCGJ recommends that HR and the BOS place greater effort on recruitment for open Plumas County positions. This is to take place no later than October 31, 2025. (F6, F7) The following are suggested: Increase multimedia exposure for unfilled positions (e.g., county websites, job fairs, social media). Share all applications with the Hiring Manager (Recommendation 2) to increase the likelihood of filling positions with qualified internal candidates.
F8
Low salaries and limited amenities in the rural community of Plumas County continue to be the main reasons why positions remain unfilled.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
This investigation has been hindered by lack of HR leadership and by lack of collaboration between Departmental Heads. In particular, HR accountability and responsiveness were impeded when the Director of HR was placed on Administrative Leave on May 17, 2022, and the Chief Administrative Officer (as acting interim Director of HR) was placed on Administrative Leave on January 21, 2025.
No recommendations for this finding
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Plumas County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.