T o w n o f C h i l m a r k P e r s o n n e l B o a r d
Approved October 16, 2008
M i n u t e s
Thursday, October 2nd, 2008
Chilmark Town Hall
8:07 am
Present: Richard Williams (Chair), Jennie Greene, Susan Heilbron, Stephen Lewenberg, Polly McDowell (Staff Liaison)
Absent: Max McCreery
Also Present: J.B. Riggs Parker (Selectman), Tim Carroll (Executive Secretary), Marina Lent (Personnel Board Secretary)
Minutes of September 25, 2008 were adopted unanimously with minor changes.
The Assistant Shellfish position description can now be sent to the Board of Selectmen (BOS) for final signature. Jennie Greene is available to participate in the hiring process.
Jennie Greene offered to combine the position descriptions of Shellfish Constable and Shellfish Propagation Agent to reflect the job currently being done by Isaiah Scheffer. Executive Secretary Tim Carroll, referring to the memo of September 30, 2008 sent by Shellfish Advisory Committee (SAC) Chair John Armstrong to the BOS, noted that the SAC does not wish to see the job descriptions of Propagation Agent and Shellfish Constable changed at this time. He explained that the position as currently filled by Isaiah Scheffer, together with the Assistant to be hired, will cover the requirements of both positions fully, and that the Attorney General’s office did not see a problem with the proposed configuration.
Members of the Personnel Board pointed out that it is not desirable to have an employee whose work is not accurately reflected in a position description. Tim Carroll then suggested that the Personnel Board draft a fourth Shellfish-related position description merging the positions of Shellfish Constable and Shellfish Propagation Agent, and that the two position descriptions be maintained as valid but dormant Town of Chilmark position descriptions.
It was agreed that Jennie Greene will undertake to draft the combined position description.
Employee Performance Appraisal Process: Chairman Richard Williams reported back on his discussions with Selectman Frank Fenner regarding the role of employee evaluations. Selectman Fenner had felt that a strong performance appraisal system was desirable. It could include a checkbox for recommending reappointment, with the opportunity to explain “if not, why not”. However, it needs to have teeth in order to be effective.
Discussion followed on various means to induce the production of performance appraisals, and the difficulties attendant on such an attempt in a complex system of elected, appointed, staff and volunteer managers. Members discussed the problems presented by Selectman Fenner’s suggestion of making the employee’s pay increases contingent on completion of an evaluation by his or her supervisor.
Tim Carroll suggested that a timeline could be established whereby, failing timely completion of the evaluation by the Board or Committee, the evaluation could be carried out by the next level of supervision (in most cases, this would be the Executive Secretary). The principle remains that we should not be granting automatic pay increases without any indication that a pay increase is merited. But the real challenge is not just to get an appraisal done, but to get an appraisal that is actually worth having, that constructively addresses the employee’s performance and indicates how to improve it. Unless and until the employee and supervisor are interested in the process and recognize it as a benefit to them in their work, we won’t have useful appraisals, and then the entire process just becomes a
waste of time, effort and political capital.
Stephen Lewenberg emphasized the need to present the process to the Town not as an administrative burden with penalties for non-compliance, but as a benefit that will result in better employees, better employee-supervisor relations, better morale, and higher productivity. It should not be viewed as a mechanism for documenting errors to build the case for punitive measures against the employee, but rather as a constructive and productive effort that leads to positive results.
Selectman Riggs Parker posed the question how to respond when you carry out the constructive review, but the goals and recommendations of the review are blithely ignored by the employee? Stephen Lewenberg replied that the proper procedure would be to reflect that lack of progress in the next review, and, if there is persistent lack of improvement, the employee should be terminated.
Tim Carroll characterized it as “inappropriate” that supervisors will submit requests for additional staff or additional staff hours, requests with clear budgetary implications, but neglect to support these proposals with a quality evaluation of current staff performance and analysis of staffing needs.
Richard Williams summed up two points made by Selectman Frank Fenner: first, that Chilmark employees should be under the authority of the Chilmark Personnel Bylaw, and that their administrators, regardless of their status (town, regional, elected, appointed, etc), should respect that Bylaw; and secondly, that the administration of employees should be more closely managed by the Executive Secretary, who should be continuously and systematically involved in employee management by the entity being served.
Tim Carroll questioned how he was to be granted the actual authority to do that: can it be granted by the BOS? This has frequently been questioned, and so his authority, such as it may be, is never definitive.
Selectman Riggs Parker described the task of personnel administration as difficult, but crucial. When it works well, the performance appraisal system is a positive thing. It is not used as a weapon, it is constructive and cooperative. Right now, the Town of Chilmark does not have a good system of personnel administration. Our history and culture goes against good personnel administration. We have never really had a clear, sound system. This is what we are now trying to create.
Tim Carroll pointed out that there is almost universal understanding of the need for a sound system of personnel administration among Town employees and officials, and broad based support for developing such a system. Instead of simply presenting a new Personnel Bylaw, we may achieve better results if we come to them to develop this concept of sound personnel administration, seek agreement on the concept, and then proceed to give life to this concept through a revised Chilmark Personnel Bylaw.
Members noted what a long way we have to go to achieve this goal, what with an entrenched “turf” mentality, with employment viewed as a sinecure by some, and where consequences of poor performance are difficult, if not impossible, to impose. Discussion ensued.
Susan Heilbron proclaimed experiencing a strong sense of déjà vu. “We’ve had this discussion” she said. And she noted that the Board had also formulated a solution. Having decided that making the Executive Secretary undertake all these performance appraisals involved too much of his time and effort, the Board had discussed developing a new position, Chief Administrative Officer. This person would be primarily in charge of personnel administration, taking the burden of these responsibilities off of the Executive Secretary.
We had approached Chuck Hodgkinson about this position, she said, and he was willing to consider it. We all felt Chuck would be excellent in this position. It ended up not coming to fruition because of some difficulty in getting it to Town Meeting. But if we’re serious about changing the system of personnel management in the Town of Chilmark, we should raise it again, and bring it to Town Meeting. This would give new impetus, and a fresh start to our whole system of personnel administration.
Tim Carroll characterized the position under discussion as a management position, not connected to the Personnel Board, and emphasized that it would need to have clear and indubitable authority. He noted that “they’re used to not cooperating with me”, and that “new blood” in human resource management could be very helpful, but emphasized that he did need to maintain involvement in employee oversight.
It was noted that a number of the responsibilities Chuck is now covering could revert back to Tim. Selectman Riggs Parker pointed out that a number of major projects Chuck has been working on are in a time of transition, making it a good time to undertake substantial changes.
Susan Heilbron suggested that it would be good to talk to Chuck before discussing this position further; Personnel Board members agreed and asked her to speak to him.
Stephen Lewenberg reviewed the conceptual changes that have taken place in personnel administration over the past decades: the Personnel Director position used to be an enforcement position. Then it evolved, and the Personnel Director became a “Human Resources Manager”. Beyond semantics, the change meant going from a narrow, punitive rule-enforcement model to a positive effort to develop the employee’s potential and talents. And this is the cultural change that the Personnel Board is trying to bring about in the Town of Chilmark today. We need broad cooperation for this cultural change.
Selectman Riggs Parker suggested that we should signal this change in the title of the Bylaw: it should be the “Chilmark Human Resources Bylaw”. And far from being simply “old shoes with new shoe polish”, this should signal a profound cultural change. Tim Carroll suggested that members of the Personnel Board could attend meetings of other boards, commissions and committees, and ask for their insights on questions of personnel management in the Town. It might be wise to leave aside the question of a new Bylaw for the time being, and address the broader issues, getting input from various parties.
This did not mean that the bylaw revision process should be suspended, but that Personnel Board members could actively seek input, both for the value of what they would learn, and also because doing so would serve to inform, and, importantly, to involve Town officials and staff with the concept of a change in management culture—thereby beginning to actually practice a new approach rather than seeking to impose it after it has been codified. He stressed that it is very important to informally engage with the BOS and other Town bodies before finalizing something. Reflecting their insights and priorities in the final product would go far to generate interest and commitment to a new and different way of managing human resources.
Stephen Lewenberg requested a list of Chilmark governing bodies which are served by Town employees, and thereby fall under some oversight of the Personnel Board. Tim Carroll asked whether we already have documentation of the new hiring practices which we have found to be helpful and effective. Polly McDowell offered to work with Marina Lent to identify these.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 am.
| 
