Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-21 Merit Appeals Board MinutesHilo, Hawaii Tuesday, September 21, 2010 The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaii, was held in the conference room of the Department of Human Resources, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 2, Hilo, Hawaii, on Tuesday, September 21, 2010. Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Vice Chair Mr. Brian De Lima, Member Mr. Kenneth Rowe, Member Mr. Ronald K. Takahashi, Director of Human Resources Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Excused: Mr. Henry "Hank" Silva, Member Chair Robinson called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. MINUTES OF AUGUST 16, 2010 MOTION: Mr. Rowe moved that the minutes of August 16, 2010 be approved as circulated. The motion was seconded by Vice Chair Yoshiyama and unanimously carried. COMMUNICATIONS A) Communication No. 10 -04, dated August 5, 2010, from Gloria Wong, Vice Chair, Cost of Government Commission, requesting that the Merit Appeals Board provide responses to questions in its effort to promote economy, efficiency and improved service in the transaction of public business in the legislative and executive branches of the County. Hawaii C unty is an Equal Qyyortunity Provider andEmyloyer. Mr. Takahashi noted that his department also received a communication from the Cost of Government (COG) Commission. In his response, Mr. Takahashi informed the COG that the HR department's personnel will be cross training to enable staff to work in multiple functional areas. They will have the opportunity to reorganize the HR department, as staffing levels will be lowered through attrition. There are five employees that are eligible to retire within the next fiscal year. One employee has officially notified Mr. Takahashi that he is going to retire. There are four other employees that are eligible to retire within the next fiscal year so the department does have an opportunity to reduce its staffing level through a reorganization where they will not be filling vacancies. Mr. Takahashi also responded that if the administration so directs, there's a possibility they may decentralize functional areas to line departments although that may put a burden on departments. MOTION: Mr. De Lima moved to receive and file Communication No. 10 -04. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. Takahashi reported the following: 1) Recruitment & Examination presentation. Mr. Takahashi introduced Ms. Gabriella Cabanas, Human Resource Manager in Recruitment & Examination. Ms. Cabanas gave the Board a brief overview of her division's activities and distributed a one -page description of the division's function. There are two HR specialists, one clerk, and Ms. Cabanas, who is the division chief, in the Recruitment & Examination Division. They basically have two types of recruitments to fill County civil service positions islandwide. The two categories are open- competitive, which the public can apply for, and internal recruitments, which County employees can apply for. Internal recruitments have been delegated to the County departments since 2002 as part of civil service reform measures, and what Ms. Cabanas is directly responsible for are the open competitive recruitments. Basically, they advertise for those recruitments as requested by the hiring departments. Ms. Cabanas' advertising budget has been reduced from $90,000 to $10,000 this fiscal year alone, which was the department's good faith effort in trying to go V bare bones to help the administration reduce its expenditures. They advertise in the West Hawaii Today and the Hawaii Tribune Herald, and those ads are kept very small. They also have the County jobs website, and ads are also on the UH Hilo's jobs website and the Department of Labor's HireNet Hawai`i.com website, which are free. In addition, they go out into the community and do recruitment talks and attend job fairs encouraging the public to apply for various open recruitments. The division also administers exams. Written exams are about 38% overall. They also administer T &Es, which are training and experience evaluations, where they assign a score to the applicant based on the applicant's education and experience. That's about 54% overall. Once they establish eligible lists, the lists are good for a year; and they refer names to the hiring departments at their request. The departments can ask for a certain number of names or they can ask for all the names. Then the Recruitment and Examination does the referral, which initiates the hiring department to conduct their selection and interview process. The table which shows numbers from 2005 to present are for open competitive recruitments. They are down to 10 open competitive recruitments for this fiscal year, which started on July 1. Applications peaked in fiscal year 2008 -2009, but the applications really are steady for the number of recruitments that they are doing. They are getting a large number of filings especially for the entry level jobs like Laborer/Park Caretaker, which is almost a thousand. Fire Fighter Recruit was over 900. The number of persons hired has dramatically decreased due to budgetary concerns. The County doesn't have a hiring freeze, but it does have hiring restrictions. They are still doing a number of recruitments, as needed, which have been approved by the administration. Over the years, the division has done things to expedite the filling of vacancies. The first thing they did in 2002 was delegate the internal recruitments to the departments, so the departments do the postings, and they issue and receive the applications. The larger departments that have HR professional specialists have been trained to screen applications. That was done in 2007. In 2008, the screening of the applications was delegated to the HR professional specialists. Therefore, not only do they screen for internal recruitments, but they also screen applications for the meeting of MQs for other personnel movements such as transfers, demotions, intergovernmental movements, and reallocations. Ms. Cabanas does random audits just to make 3 sure they're on track and she is there to help them whenever they need assistance or have questions in terms of screening applications. Other division work includes conducting priority job placement for medically injured employees who can never return to their usual and customary job. In accordance with County policy, these priority job placements are done for workers' comp injuries, but they're also done for personal illnesses and injuries. Ms. Cabanas also collaborates with a number of community organizations on workforce development to encourage persons to apply for County jobs. Right now hiring is at a low, but the County does need to be ready for when the boom returns; and the County wants to always be an employer of choice in the community. They are working with community organizations, especially with UH Hilo, HCC, and Workforce Development, Department of Labor, to encourage internships with County departments. Ms. Cabanas also coordinates with the Hawaii Community College for the cooperative vocational education where the County employs HCC students with County funds, while they receive college credits from HCC. Ms. Cabanas conducts training to hiring departments on effective job interviewing, as she wants them to be methodical in their selection process and be in compliance with various federal and state laws in terms of employment. The division is pursuing funding for a web based recruitment software system and are looking at grant funding. They have written to Senator Inouye's office for his help in looking for a grant that they can apply for. In the meantime, Ms. Cabanas is working on the development of an RFP. They are also working on developing a Facebook County jobs page, as they want to keep with the trends. Another project is the volunteerism project. They secured a $5,000 grant from Research & Development to kick this off, and they want to have a link to the jobs page. People may check the jobs page, but as jobs are limited, they may decide to volunteer with the County in different capacities. They are also placing their documents, applications, and certifications into laserfiche, which is a repository program that stores documents for an indefinite period of time without creating storage problems on file servers. Mr. Rowe asked about union involvement in the volunteerism project to avoid it becoming an issue with the unions. Ms. Cabanas responded that this project will not take away from any civil service work. This is to supplement and mentor and to provide for internships. They have not formally started any discussions with the union, but Mr. Takahashi will spearhead that. Mr. Rowe asked if the recruitments are also open to non - residents, and Ms. Cabanas responded that there is no residency requirement. Regarding the web -based recruitment system, Mr. De Lima commented that in his law firm, they purchased and spent a lot of money for litigation software. In reality, they found that the most effective use for managing the litigation was pdf professional. There is no maintenance cost and no ongoing expense except for the pdf professional. He suggested exploring a system with the County's internal computer division to determine whether they could utilize a commercial software in a way that might work for HR without the expense of the ongoing maintenance fee that Ms. Cabanas had mentioned. Ms. Cabanas explained that the system HR has in mind is more encompassing than what the pdf professional can provide. It's basically taking the process from paper to paperless, and includes not only the applications, but certifications — the referrals of names from the HR department to the hiring department. The County will have the ability to have user access to different features, and it's all electronic. Another thing is they won't have to be worried about maintaining file servers because a file server would be taken care of by the vendor and not the County of Hawaii. Mr. De Lima noted that everything gets scanned in his office, and he likes the concept of digital. The reality, however, is that the County has a technology division. The County should be going towards that methodology because if the County is going to pay someone offsite to host the County's data, sooner or later the County will be at their mercy, so to speak. Vice Chair Yoshiyama asked Mr. Takahashi what his vision was for personnel records. Mr. Takahashi responded that the department will be going paperless. The Office of the Corporation Counsel had taken the lead with laserfiche and HR is scheduled for the last phase of it, so the department is just now getting into it. 5 Chair Robinson noted that he had had a positive experience using the pdf professional in filling out a form with the State. He also shared his experience when hiring a party for a marketing website and ended up not being able to access the information when that person got sick. Ms. Cabanas stated that she appreciates the Board's comments and will consider them. NEXT MEETING DATE Chair Robinson noted that the Board's next meeting will be on October 19, 2010; however, if there are no appeals or other matters on the agenda, the meeting may be cancelled. November's meeting will be held on November 16, 2010. The meeting recessed at 10:37 a.m. I Hilo, Hawaii Tuesday, September 21, 2010 HEARING — 10:30 A.M. — TODD ZEILLER — WERE ANY CIVIL SERVICE LAWS, RULES, OR REGULATIONS VIOLATED IN THE APPELLANT'S NONSELECTION TO A POSITION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT? Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Member Mr. Brian De Lima, Member Mr. Kenneth M. Rowe, Member Mr. Julian White, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Others Present: Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Ms. Margaret Masunaga, Deputy Planning Director Chair Robinson called the hearing to order at 10:45 a.m. and noted the absence of the Appellant, who resides in Florida. Ms. Noda orally moved to dismiss Mr. Todd Zeiller's appeal pursuant to state law, HRS, Section 91- 10(5). The party initiating the proceeding, Mr. Zeiller, has the burden of proof, including the burden of producing evidence and the burden of persuasion, and the degree or quantum of proof. The burden on Mr. Zeiller is that the proof shall be a preponderance of the evidence that the Planning Department violated any civil service rule, law, or procedure. Since Mr. Zeiller is not present and is not appearing to testify, nor has he produced any documentation or evidence in support of his appeal, he has not met his burden of proof or persuasion, or burden of evidence, and therefore the County requests this appeal be dismissed. 7 Mr. White noted that the issue is framed as "any civil service laws, rules, regulations violated by the employer in the nonselection of the Appellant for a position with the Planning Department." He asked Ms. Noda what her position is on that, given what the statute says, as it appears that the statement of the issues places some burden on the employer to show that he or she did not violate rules, regulations, or statutes. Ms. Noda responded that that is the framing of the issue that the Board presented to narrow and focus this hearing; however, the initial burden is on the Appellant, and the County should not have to be defending against nothing. MOTION: Mr. Rowe moved to convene into an executive session to consult with counsel. The motion was seconded by Vice Chair Yoshiyama and unanimously carried. The Board convened into an executive session at 10:48 a.m. and reconvened at 10:52 a.m. MOTION: Mr. De Lima moved to deny the County's motion to dismiss. The motion was seconded by Vice Chair Yoshiyama and unanimously carried. Chair Robinson stated that the Board will proceed with the hearing. He noted that the Appellant was not present, and the Appellant did receive notice of the hearing. The Appellant was asked to provide information for this hearing and none has been received. Ms. Noda stated the following in presenting her case: As an offer of proof, the County would move into evidence all County Exhibits A -G. Exhibit A is the recruitment advertisement for the Planning Program Director. Exhibit B is the position description for the Planning Program Director; Exhibit C a letter from the Planning Department dated June 21, 2010, from Planning Director Bobby Jean Leithead -Todd, and actually signed by Margaret Masunaga, to the Appellant Todd Zeiller explaining the recruitment process for the County and what the Planning Department had done. Exhibit D is the application for Todd Zeiller. Exhibit E is the application for Garrett Edward Smith who was the person selected to fill the Program Manager for administrative permits. Exhibit F is the application for April Suprenant who was the person selected for the Program Manager position for long -range planning; and Exhibit G is the composite score sheet for just these three people — Todd Zeiller, one of the applicants, and the two selectees, April Suprenant and Garrett Smith. For Exhibit G, the comprehensive score sheet, if Daryn Arai is called to testify, he would testify that he compiled the scoresheets for all 14 applicants, and upon Ms. Noda's request condensed the scoresheet down to the two selectees and Mr. Zeiller. On the back of Exhibit G, which is page 2, the composite scores show that April Suprenant's total score was 806, placing her second out of all the applicants. Garrett Smith's total score from all three interview panelists was 819; and Todd Zeiller's total score was 533. Mr. Arai would also testify that the number above their total score shows the placement of all the applicants. Garrett Smith placed first, April Suprenant placed second, and Mr. Zeiller placed tenth. If called to testify, Margaret Masunaga, Deputy Director of the Planning Department, and also one of the panelists along with Mr. Arai, would testify that although Mr. Zeiller appeared to have some experience, training, and background and did meet the minimum qualifications for either of the two positions, his qualifications seemed to be more of a consultant rather than a program manager that the department was looking for; and the background, skills, experiences, and training of the two selectees, Mr. Smith and Ms. Suprenant, were much more in keeping with the qualities and background that the Planning Department was looking for to fill these two positions. If called to testify, they would compare Mr. Zeiller's background, skills, abilities to the two selectees. Based on the evidence that's been presented to the Board at this point, the County Planning Department has not violated any rule, law or procedure as far as minimum qualifications and the selection process. The composite scoresheet does set forth for the Board every single score that was done by the interview panelists, and it shows that Mr. Zeiller was far from being the top candidate for either Planning position. As such, based on the proof presented by the County that all recruitment and selection processes were followed by the County and that Mr. Zeiller has not proved that there was any violation by the County, the County again requests that Mr. Zeiller's appeal be denied. MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved that the Appellant's appeal be denied as no civil service laws, rules, or regulations were 0 violated. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. The Board recessed at 11:00 a.m. Ice Hilo, Hawaii Tuesday, September 21, 2010 HEARING — TERI J. BOTELHO — WERE ANY CIVIL SERVICE LAWS, RULES, OR REGULATIONS VIOLATED IN THE APPELLANT'S TERMINATION FROM EMPLOYMENT WITH THE OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY? Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Member Mr. Brian De Lima, Member Mr. Kenneth M. Rowe, Member Mr. Julian White, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Others Present: Ms. Teri J. Botelho, Appellant Mr. William Reece, Attorney for Appellant Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel The following witnesses testified: Ms. Joyce Seelen, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Ms. Dale Ross, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Mr. Dean Sumida, Investigator Mr. Jay T. Kimura, Prosecuting Attorney Ms. Teri J. Botelho, Appellant Chair Robinson called the hearing to order at 11:02 a.m. The hearing remained closed to the public. Deliberations: The Board convened into an executive session at 3:18 p.m. and reconvened at 3:30 p.m. MOTION: Mr. De Lima moved that the appeal be denied as no civil service laws, rules, or regulations were violated. The motion was seconded by Vice Chair Yoshiyama and unamiously carried. The hearing ended at 3:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ronald K. Takahashi Secretary APPRO ' • 40/110P,....111110b G. Rick Robinson Chair vym 17