Sonoma County Grand Jury
• 2003-2004
Evaluation, Discipline and Termination July 1, 2004
⚠️ 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 7 findings
F1
The employee evaluation, discipline and termination processes are governed by and follow federal, state and county laws: workers’ compensation, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Civil Service Rules, and union contracts. County policy and protocol are established and the processes involve personnel and offices from County Administration, the 28 county department heads, union representatives, the Retirement Board, and the Civil Service Commission. There are approximately 4,000 employees in the county, 90% in just 5 of the 28 departments, and 90% are covered by union contracts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
When the head of a department retires, Human Resources must notify all department managers and supervisors that they are expected to continue monitoring and performing the evaluation, discipline and termination processes during the time of transition.
F2
Between June 2004 and June 2005, including the County Administrator, one-third of the department heads will be retiring. 2/4 July 1, 2004
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Within the next 2 years, the Department of Human Resources, Sheriff’s, Probation, Transportation and Public Works, and all other departments should implement a computer program for employee evaluations comparable to that used by Health Services and Human Services.
F3
Department heads have the responsibility for making sure employee evaluations are done at the appropriate times: 6 months for new employees who are on probation, once a year until an employee reaches the top of his/her pay scale, and biennially thereafter. “On the spot” oral evaluations are used as necessary. Managers and supervisors do the evaluations for their employees. There are differences from one department to another in criteria to be evaluated, formats, methods of rating, and in the quality of the recording. Approximately 85% of employee evaluations are completed on time.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Human Resources and department heads should continue to see that all supervisors and managers are trained in the following: performing employee evaluations, using the progressive steps of disciplinary action, writing objective behavioral goals and setting time limits on needed improvements.
F4
Two of the largest departments, Health Services and Human Services, use computer programs to do their evaluations. Their programs are interactive. They guide and prompt the evaluator in a comprehensive manner resulting in a more thorough, time saving and objective evaluation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Human Resources Department must remind, in writing, all 28 of the Heads of the Departments that chronically poor performing employees should receive progressive discipline as outlined in the county Memo 00-003-00P Recommended Disciplinary Action Procedures.
F5
The disciplinary process is complex and time consuming. The Recommended Disciplinary Action Procedures document provides guidelines on informal and formal means of discipline. Informal refers to supervisor-employee talks or written documentation (write- ups). Formal refers to actions of suspension, reduction in pay, demotion or discharge. A “Skelly” hearing is the first step in the formal proceedings. The employee, the employee’s supervisor and the employee’s chosen representative meet with the department head, and the employee is informed of the intended disciplinary action. The employee then responds. If the employee chooses to appeal the management decision, the Civil Service Commissioner sets up a settlement conference, and attempts mediation. In these very few cases, 1/3-1/2 reach a settlement and the employee returns to work, takes retirement, resigns, or is discharged. In unresolved cases, the process proceeds under the auspices of the Civil Service Commission.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Staff should strive to complete all employee evaluations on-time. Required Responses to the Findings: None Required Responses to the Recommendations Director, Human Resources - R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5 Sheriff - R2 Director, Personnel, Sheriff’s Department - R2 Director, Transportation and Public Works - R2 Director, Probation - R2
F6
Decisions and choices that staff make for chronically poor performing employees are open to uncertainty and a wide range of possible actions. Decisions are not only based upon employee performance, but are affected by other considerations such as: budget constraints, program cuts, department workload, an employee’s seniority and retirement status. Staff may not follow the usual progressive disciplinary actions, and instead may chose to transfer the employee into another position in the Department.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
“Last chance” agreements, usually those referring to drug or alcohol abuse by an employee, quickly focus then shorten the disciplinary process. Though termination can be immediate, most agreements take progressive steps of discipline that focus on specific behavioral changes. If the objectives of the agreement are not reached, the employee is terminated. Conclusions The well established policies and protocol provide the quality and uniformity needed for this county’s systems of evaluation, discipline and termination. Though the autonomy placed into the hands of each department head allows for discretionary decisions, the process involves multiple services and is a collaborative effort. Consequently, it is no surprise that the process is complex and time consuming. If the progressive steps of discipline for chronically poor performing employees are suspended, the process may become even more time-consuming, costly and affect the workplace adversely. The jury gives special recognition to department heads, managers, and supervisors for their efforts and time spent completing employee evaluations in a timely manner. 3/4 July 1, 2004
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 3The well established policies and protocol provide the quality and uniformity needed for this county’s systems of evaluation, discipline and termination. Though the autonomy placed into the hands of each department head allows for discretionary decisions, the process involves multiple services and is a collaborative effort. Consequently, it is no surprise that the process is complex and time consuming. If the progressive steps of discipline for chronically poor performing employees are suspended, the process may become even more time-consuming, costly and affect the workplace adversely. The jury gives special recognition to department heads, managers, and supervisors for their efforts and time spent completing employee evaluations in a timely manner. 3/4 July 1, 2004
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Sonoma County Sheriff
Elected County Office
Sonoma County Transportation Authority
Transit Authority