HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-19 Merit Appeals Board MinutesMERIT BOARD OF APPEALS
Department of Human Resources
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 102
Hilo, Hawaii
March 19, 2014
CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaii, was called
Item 1): to order at 11:04 a.m. by Chairperson Kenneth M. Rowe, at the Department of
Human Resources Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 2, Hilo, Hawaii,
on Wednesday, March 19, 2014.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mr. Kenneth M. Rowe, Chair
Mr. Jubilee N. Kuewa, Vice -Chair
Mr. David K. S. Nahuina, Member
Ms. Ida H. Otake, Member
Ms. June R. Rabago, Member
Also Present: Ms. Sharon Toriano, Director, HR Department
Mr. Joseph Kamelamela, Senior Deputy Corporation Counsel,
Ofc. of the Corp. Counsel
Ms. Jamie Martines, HR Assistant, HR Department
Ms. Glynis Yamada, Secretary -Reporter, HR Department
Members of the Public Present: None
ADDENDUM TO The Chair directed the Board to the next order of business, Addendum to
AGENDA Agenda.
Item 2):
(There was none.)
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public.
PUBLIC
Item 3): (There were none.)
APPROVAL OF The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
MINUTES Approval of Minutes of August 29 and September 18, 2013
Item 4):
Motion to Approve: Ms. Rabago moved that the minutes of August 29 and September 18, 2013
be approved. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kuewa.
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
The voice vote to approve the Minutes of August 29 and
September 18, 2013, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe — 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
EXCUSED: None.
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS Communications.
Item 5): (There were none.)
CONSENT ITEMS By general consent, the following item was taken out of order, as requested by
CHANGE ORDER Chair Rowe and with no objections from the Board.
OF BUSINESS:
UNFINISHED The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
BUSINESS (Item 7): Unfinished Business.
COMMUNICATION NO. 13-02, RECEIVED ON AUGUST 1, 2013, FROM
JAY ISHIBASHI, HGEA MCEC AGENT, ON BEHALF OF STANLEY
NAKASONE, APPEALING HIS INVOLUNTARY TRANSFER TO ANOTHER
POSITION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
(DEFERRED: AUGUST 21, 2013)
Mr. Kamelamela recommended a motion to dismiss at the Merit Appeals Board
meeting to be scheduled in May. He communicated through e-mail with
Mr. Ted Hong, who represents Mr. Nakasone, who had no objection for the motion
to dismiss.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved to defer Communication No. 13-02 until May 21, 2014.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Otake.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe — 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
EXCUSED: None.
Page 2
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
RETURN TO The Chair directed the Board to return to the regular order of business and take
ORDER OF up New Business.
BUSINESS:
NEW BUSINESS The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business, New
Item 6): Business.
A) INTRODUCTION OF NEW MERIT APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS
Chair Rowe welcomed the two new Members of the Merit Appeals Board:
Ida H. Otake and David K. S. Nahuina. He asked them to share a little bit about
themselves.
Ms. Otake stated that she's lived in Kohala for the past 24 years and is retired from
the hospital system. She's enjoying her retirement and is here today to help. She's
originally from Windward Oahu.
Mr. Nahuina stated that he lives in Kona, is a teacher and teaches history, and prior
to that he was doing his doctorate at the University of Massachusetts. His favorite
past -time is fishing. He enjoys the opportunity to be here today.
RECESS: At 11:11 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 11:12 a.m.
CONSENT ITEMS By general consent, the following items were taken out of order, as requested by
CHANGE ORDER Chair Rowe and with no objections from the Board.
OF BUSINESS:
C) ANNUAL EVALUATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Chair Rowe referenced the handouts concerning the evaluation of the Director of
Human Resources and stated that this was the evaluation performed for former
Director Ron Takahashi. They want to be sure that the Director is on track to do
his or her part of our Department of Human Resources for the County of Hawaii.
Chair Rowe asked Ms. Toriano to explain the hand-outs.
Ms. Toriano proceeded to explain the process:
HANDOUT A:
She directed their attention to the first handout labeled "Handout A"—
"Merit Appeals Board, Human Resources Director, Performance Process
for FYI 1-12" (SEE ATT. A). This document represents the flow of how
the evaluation process was completed by June 30. The "June 30" date, as
Page 3
Merit Board of Appeals
March 19, 2014
defined in the Merit Appeals Board's Rules and Regulations, is the date at
which time you must complete the review of the Director.
HANDOUT B:
The first component involves feedback from the other department directors
or administrators. "Handout B" is the cover letter from the Merit Appeals
Board sent out to every department or administrators in the County (SEE
ATT. B). The actual survey is short and sweet, primarily, because if we
want them to complete the survey, you'll need to keep it short and sweet.
The Merit Appeals Board has full latitude to change any of the questions in
the survey. The cover letter then goes out with the survey attached.
HANDOUT C:
Realizing that this office works mainly with employees in other
departments, we don't' have a lot of public contact. Primarily, the public
contact that we have is with applicants. "Handout C" is a "recruitment
satisfaction survey," which is available to all applicants through our
NeoGov system. At the end of the year, this report can get checked and
tallied to see how the Department of Human Resources is doing with the
on-line applicants, and it would be made available to the Merit Appeals
Board.
HANDOUT D:
This represents the form that's used to document the review (SEE ATT. D).
At the beginning of the review period, which is July 1, the Human
Resources Director would define the goals to be achieved during the review
period. In addition to the goals, other factors would be financial
management, planning/prioritizing/and organizing, problem
solving/decision making, and leadership.
In the "Rating" column of Handout D, there are numbers listed. For
example, under "Planning, Prioritizing and Organizing" there are numbers
listed -1, 3, 6, 7, 8, et cetera. This is a reference for the Board to consider.
"Goal # 1'7 --what was the goal and how does it play into that factor for
planning/prioritizing/and organizing? The other numbers represent the
survey questions that were sent out to the departments or administrators to
evaluate the Human Resources Director. In accordance with the Merit
Appeals Board Rules, a rating would then be given with either a "Meets" or
"Does Not Meet."
HANDOUT E:
Annually, at the beginning of each fiscal year, we define our overall
Department's goals, and it ties in directly with our budget planning process
where we submit our "Department Summaries" to the Hawaii County
Page 4
Merit Board of Appeals
March 19, 2014
Council. This facilitates identifying goals for the director and it's more for
reference and information (SEE ATT. E).
Because we monitor our goals, you will see listed on the Merit Appeals
Board Agenda the "Director's Report." This is the feedback or the
statistical information on how our department is performing on each of our
goals.
Ms. Toriano commented that we are now in April. As far as establishing her goals
at the beginning of the review period, she was fortunate enough to serve as the
Director, effective September 18, 2013. This is our first meeting since then, and
she's already behind the curveball when it comes to establishing her goals and
objectives for the current fiscal year.
Chair Rowe stated that we're more than halfway through the year and he isn't sure
how to proceed as we'll have a change in leadership soon. The evaluation of the
Human Resources Director is to evaluate her goals, but we have not set those
goals. He's not sure whether to defer this or set the goals at this meeting or the
next meeting, and will open this up for discussion.
Mr. Kamelamela informed the Board that in accordance with Rule 100-11, Title II
— Rules of the Merit Appeals Board, the "Performance evaluation" needs to be
done on a yearly basis by June. Since the director's been here for half a year, you
could base your evaluation during that particular time period. By doing so, at least
you'll meet the requirements of the Rules.
Mr. Kamelamela stated that it's his understanding that the reason why the prior
director wasn't evaluated was because he was retiring, and that it was so close in
time that the Board felt that it was unnecessary to do so.
Mr. Kamelamela stated that in accordance with the Rule, they have a June date in
which to do the evaluation. Since we're meeting now, a schedule needs to be set
using "Handout A" as a template, and move forward from there.
Mr. Nahuina commented that the goals were set by the former director and
inquired whether the goals would be the same or would it change.
Ms. Toriano replied that she would like the opportunity to review and possibly
change "Goal #2, Executed union agreements and represent Mayor at
negotiations." It was appropriate at that time as we were in the midst of
negotiating contracts, and it may not be appropriate for the next fiscal year.
Ms. Toriano commented on what Mr. Kamelamela stated concerning being
evaluated during the period that she actually served in the position. She would
appreciate being evaluated from September to June 30.
Page 5
Merit Board of Appeals
March 19, 2014
Chair Rowe stated that Ms. Toriano wasn't able to set her goals in September
because the Board did not meet—an oversight on their part. At the time, they felt
that it would be more appropriate to have the new Merit Appeals Board Members
on board to assist with the evaluation and to set the goals for the director. At this
moment, we're three to four months before the end of June and he doesn't know
how we could set any goals and do the evaluation.
Chair Rowe asked the Members for their thoughts in this process. It's only going
to be a three-month goal—and how do we gauge the three months? He wondered
if this matter should be deferred to the next meeting and, collaboratively, with the
new Chair on board, set the goals in July for the next year.
Ms. Rabago commented that under the Rules for the evaluation, if nothing adverse
has occurred, then the director "meets" by default because we didn't do anything.
Her preference would be, at the May or June meeting, they could receive
Ms. Toriano's goals and we could evaluate her for the following fiscal year
2013-2014. The new members weren't here and she only came on board about six
months ago. Again, we haven't heard anything adverse, Ms. Toriano "meets" her
goal of June 30, and we have a plan in place for her goals.
Chair Rowe stated that it's hard to evaluate Ms. Toriano based on when she was
hired in September. His thoughts are to defer this, then come June set her goals in
June, then July 1 we become current to evaluate her the following year. It's
cleaner and safer, as well as fair for her.
Ms. Otake commented that we still would need something in place that says she
"meets" expectations by June.
Chair Rowe said that it's something that they need to discuss because there's no
way she can set her goals. You can agree to accept her as "meets" and then on
July 1 st, she moves forward with her goals and objectives. This would be fair.
When doing a performance appraisal on his staff, it's hard for him to evaluate them
if they've only been there for a half year. You need to be able to evaluate them—
the goals that are set, what you witness, and then to apply to their evaluation.
Mr. Kuewa commented that the top three goals were developed by the former
Human Resources Director and Ms. Toriano said it doesn't necessarily apply to
what's going on now. He asked Ms. Toriano in regards to the organizational goals,
whether she considered those to be her goals or looked at them as her performance
factors.
Ms. Toriano replied that she did review Goals #1, #2, and #3. Goal #1 was fine as
it aligns with what we report to the County Council. Goal #2 is the one that may
not be appropriate for next fiscal year. Goal #3 was fine as she appreciates the
Page 6
Merit Board of Appeals
March 19, 2014
value of feedback from the people and the departments that she serves. She didn't
have a chance to solicit from the Merit Appeals Board what they, if anything,
would like to see.
Mr. Kuewa commented that she didn't consider them to be her goals when she
assumed the position as director.
Ms. Toriano replied that, again, Goals #1 and #3—and the rest she considers
standard that is part and parcel to the job.
Mr. Kuewa clarified that she did consider them to be standard performance factors
as the Human Resources Director. Ms. Toriano replied, "Absolutely."
Mr. Kuewa asked Ms. Toriano whether she would consider it fair that for this
rating cycle, we evaluate her on the four goals.
Ms. Toriano replied that she has no objections. Her question to the Merit Appeals
Board is how she could help them by providing the information that is pertinent or
meaningful to come to the conclusion of "meets" or "does not meet." For instance,
would you like to see where the Department stands financially as compared to the
budget? Would you like examples provided over the last six months concerning
planning, organization, and prioritizing?
Mr. Kuewa commented that he believes it's what the former Human Resources
Director did. He had a presentation at some point of this cycle where he addressed
the performance goals and factors. If it's acceptable to Ms. Toriano and the
Members, he would like to proceed on an evaluation based on just those
performance factors—if it's agreeable to all as being fair. It's important to
maintain the momentum of evaluating the director annually. We could still use a
cycle, like this, in order to complete the evaluation by the end of June.
Mr. Nahuina wondered whether we could do a combination of both—say that
Ms. Toriano "meets" because there're no major blow-ups happening, and doing the
survey. The survey would be more for Ms. Toriano to look at. If there's an area
where it needs to be addressed, she'll know. It would be a great opportunity for
her going into the next year to set her goals. So, rather than being a tool for us, the
survey becomes a tool for Ms. Toriano in setting her goals for next year.
Ms. Rabago wanted clarification from Mr. Kuewa whether they were going to
evaluate Ms. Toriano on the following four factors—financial management,
planning, problem solving, leadership—and whether they'll be setting aside Goals
#1, 42, and #3 for this period. Mr. Kuewa agreed.
Mr. Kuewa reiterated that he'd like a survey, and agreed with Mr. Nahuina that it
would be a useful tool for Ms. Toriano and for them.
Page 7
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
Ms. Otake inquired whether the survey questions are relevant as far as
Ms. Toriano's short period of time as director or whether the questions need to be
changed.
Chair Rowe replied that the questions themselves are standardized—the four
categories that were referenced earlier. There's no need to reinvent the wheel as a
system had been agreed upon and built for future evaluations. The goals for
Ms. Toriano will change, for example, if it's a negotiation year or if there are
budget cuts or a surplus.
Mr. Kuewa commented that the questions had a lot to do with customer service
and responsiveness of the staff to organizational needs. It doesn't zero in on
financial management per se, but touches on leadership, problem solving, and
decision-making of Ms. Toriano's organization. He feels it's still useful "as is"
without any changes.
Mr. Nahuina raised a concern that Ms. Toriano has been in her position for a short
period of time. You'll need to make a choice from the questions, but wonders if
there should be another choice because someone may say, "You know, I haven't
come across this." In fairness to Ms. Toriano, there maybe should be another
choice.
Ms. Rabago replied that she hears Mr. Nahuina's concern and asked if they should
add another choice—"Not Applicable"—but maybe should wait until they get
through this first evaluation.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved that the Human Resources Annual Evaluation be sent out in
the first week of May and be returned no later than May 28, 2014. Seconded by
Mr. Kuewa.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe – 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
EXCUSED: None.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved that Ms. Toriano will give a presentation at the June meeting
concerning the feedback from the survey as well as provide information on
financial management, planning/prioritizing/organizing, problem
solving/decision-making, and leadership. Ms. Toriano will use the evaluation to
set her goals for July. Seconded by Mr. Kuewa.
Page 8
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
Ms. Toriano commented that it would be helpful for her to ascertain the survey
results to set her goals. Chair Rowe stated that it's because she would be able to
gauge the present data to see where she's at. Ms. Toriano agreed.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe — 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
EXCUSED: None.
Ms. Toriano commented that when the survey gets distributed, it's announced as
something confidential that she's not privy to, and that the evaluation results go to
the Merit Appeals Board.
Mr. Nahuina clarified that when the account is set up with Survey Monkey, it's his
understanding that there's anonymity for the directors. Chair Rowe stated that's
the intent of the survey.
Ms. Toriano commented that the results that she would see would be the
"cumulative" responses of each answer. Sometimes on the written (comment)
section, she knows who exactly wrote the comment—to be blunt. She doesn't
want to interfere with the process, which is to be as open and honest as possible.
The survey results would go to Glynis.
Chair Rowe confirmed that the results would go to Glynis, which she will share
with the Board Members. He asked Ms. Toriano whether she'd like to discuss the
evaluation in open or closed session. Sometimes the media and other individuals
are present at the meeting, although the results are shared in open session.
Ms. Toriano replied that the Merit Appeals Board did give that option to the
former Human Resources Director. She commented that with her Human
Resources hat on, these types of matters are best handled in a closed and
confidential manner.
Ms. Rabago stated that she's a firm believer that when there is personnel
evaluations, that it's best done in private. All the Members agreed.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved that the evaluation of the Human Resources Director as well
as the presentation by Ms. Toriano will be held in closed or executive session.
Seconded by Mr. Nahuina.
Page 9
Merit Board of Appeals
Motion:
DIRECTOR'S
REPORT
Item 8):
March 19, 2014
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe — 5.
NOES:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
EXCUSED:
None.
At this time, there was discussion concerning amending the cover letter prior to
distribution of the evaluation to the directors. Mr. Kamelamela informed the
Board that a motion to amend the cover letter isn't necessary. It was agreed by all
Board Members that the revised cover letter would be e-mailed to all Members for
informational purposes, and that the Chair would approve the revised letter.
Also, it was agreed that the questions contained in the evaluation will not be
revised (i.e. adding "Not Applicable).
Ms. Rabago moved that the Chair will approve and sign -off on the survey cover
letter. Seconded by Mr. Nahuina.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe — 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
EXCUSED: None.
D) CHANGE IN MEETING TIMES) OF THE MERIT APPEALS BOARD
Chair Rowe stated that they will be electing the new Chair and Vice -Chair, and
would defer the discussion on changing the meeting times until after the election.
The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business, Director's
Report.
Ms. Toriano stated that the Director's Quarterly MAB Reports for the Period of
July 2013 — December 2013 are the goals being reported quarterly.
Chair Rowe clarified that the Quarterly Reports goes according to the goals that
were set by the former director. Ms. Toriano added that this report aligns with
what's reported to the County Council bi-annually.
Page 10
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved to accept the Director's Report. Seconded by Mr. Nahuina.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Rowe — 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
EXCUSED: None.
RETURN TO The Chair Directed the Board to return to the regular order of business, and take
ORDER OF up New Business, Item B) Elect Merit Appeals Board Chair and Vice -Chair for
BUSINESS: Calendar Year 2014.
B) ELECT MERIT APPEALS BOARD CHAIR AND VICE -CHAIR FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 2014
Chair Rowe asked Mr. Kamelamela whether he would be able to vote on the
motion to elect the Chair and Vice -Chair of the Merit Appeals Board because he
wouldn't be a Board Member after today. Mr. Kamelamela replied that he is
unable to vote.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved to nominate Mr. Kuewa as Chair of the Merit Appeals
Board. Seconded by Mr. Nahuina.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES:
Board Members Kuewa, Nahuina, Otake, and
Rabago - 4.
NOES:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
EXCUSED:
None.
At this time, Mr. Nahuina nominated Ms. Rabago to serve as Vice -Chair; however,
Ms. Rabago respectfully declined. Ms. Otake mentioned that she was going to
nominate Mr. Nahuina; however, he politely requested that she not do that because
he's a new Member and would like to understand the Board first.
Chair Rowe asked Mr. Kamelamela that there is no other Member to be nominated
at this time, and wondered if the Board could reserve the right to nominate a Vice -
Chair at a later date.
Ms. Rabago asked that in the absence of the Chair, and there is no Vice -Chair, who
would chair the meeting.
Page 11
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
Mr. Kamelamela replied that there isn't a Vice -Chair position in the Merit Appeals
Board Rules, but it has been past practice to have a Vice -Chair. If the Chair is not
present to run the meeting then the Board will need to either vote on who's going
to run the meeting or the Chair can designate a Presiding Officer.
Ms. Rabago stated that it wasn't her intention to take any type of "officer" position
because she's retired, but agreed to be nominated to serve as Vice -Chair.
Motion: Mr. Nahuina moved to nominate Ms. Rabago as Vice -Chair of the Merit Appeals
Board. Seconded by Mr. Kuewa.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES:
Board Members Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Kuewa - 4.
NOES:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
EXCUSED:
None.
At this time, Mr. Rowe stepped down as Chair and Member of the Merit Appeals
Board and passed the gavel to Chair Kuewa.
Chair Kuewa thanked Mr. Rowe for his five years of service to the County as
Board Member and Chair of the Merit Appeals Board. Mr. Rowe thanked
everyone.
D) CHANGE IN MEETING TIME(S) OF THE MERIT APPEALS BOARD
Mr. Kamelamela informed the Board that according to the Rule 100-6, the meeting
will convene 9:30 a.m. or whatever the Board decides.
Ms. Rabago commented that she has no preference and inquired with Members
Nahuina and Otake, who both agreed that 11 o'clock works well.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved to keep the meeting time of the Merit Appeals Board at
11:00 a.m. Seconded by Mr. Nahuina.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES:
Board Members Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Kuewa - 4.
NOES:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
EXCUSED:
None.
Page 12
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
SCHEDULE NEXT The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business, Schedule
MEETING DATE Next Meeting Date.
Item 9):
Mr. Toriano informed the Members that she will be travelling out-of-state from
June 10 and would return on June 24. Typically, the Board's meetings are held the
third Wednesday of each month, which would make it June 18"', so she wouldn't be
present for the meeting, and given the fact that she will be doing a presentation, if
she could ask the Board to move the meeting date.
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved that the next Merit Appeals Board meeting be held on
June 25. Seconded by Ms. Otake.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Nahuina, Otake, Rabago,
and Chair Kuewa - 4.
NOES:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
EXCUSED:
None.
Mr. Nahuina inquired whether the Board could hold meetings in Kona, and this
could be considered for future discussion.
Mr. Kamelamela replied that according to Rule 100-6, all meetings are held in the
conference room of the Department of Human Resources. He inquired whether
there was a conference room in Kona in the Department of Human Resources at the
West Hawaii Civic Center. The Rule doesn't say "Hilo."
Ms. Toriano replied that the West Hawaii Civil Center was designed with space
allocation for Human Resources; however, over time, it's changed. She is located
close to the assigned area or the conference room because, in theory, it was allocated
to the Department of Human Resources. The conference room would probably be
available for the Board's meetings. It's a smaller room. It could accommodate the
public and it's accessible. There are no videoconferencing capabilities from that
location.
Page 13
Merit Board of Appeals March 19, 2014
The next scheduled meeting of the Merit Appeals Board will be held on Wednesday,
June 25, 2014, 11:00 a.m., at the Department of Human Resources Conference
Room.
ADJOURNMENT There being no other business, at 12:23 p.m., Chair Kuewa declared the meeting
Item 10): adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
�a4)
Glynis Yama a
Secretary
APPROVED:
c
J bilee N. Kuew
hair
ST/gy
Page 14
Merit Appeals Board
Human Resources Director
Performance Evaluation Process for FYI 1-12
TIME PERIOD
ACTION
April
Enlist the Mayor's assistance with encouraging
100% participation in the MAB survey.
May 16
Distribute survey with deadline for response no
later than the end of the month (May 2012).
Velma to extract survey results and forward results
to the MAB chair.
Gabe to extract Neo Gov applicant survey results
and forward to HR Director.
June
Open or closed discussion?
Director's presentation - Summary of goals,
expectations/requirements were met or not met.
Discuss and review aggregated survey responses
and any other input received.
(Ref: MAB Rules)
Discuss overall rating of "meets" or "does not
meet" with written notice to follow.
July
Identify performance goals to be achieved
during the next fiscal year (FY 12-13).
Establish MAB survey questions for next fiscal year
& define target audience/survey participants.
Revised 11/16/11
ATT. A
The Merit Appeals Board has arranged for a confidential employee
survey to be administered to County of Hawaii department directors
and program administrators. We are confident that with your support,
the information gained through this survey will go a long way to
helping the Department of Human Resources improve!
Participation is voluntary and it is our sincere hope that you will assist
us by participating! You will remain anonymous as your individual
identity is not being requested. Also, please know that survey
responses are being collected and aggregated by a third party with
survey results be forwarded to the Merit Appeals Board.
Statistical information gained from this survey will be shared on a
"need to know" basis. Ronald Takahashi, Human Resources Director,
will be provided a numerical summary of all responses but will NOT be
provided information concerning who responded or did not respond to
the survey, or what individual responses were given.
The survey includes twelve (12) questions and is estimated to take
five (5) to ten (10) minutes to complete. With the exception of the
last two (2) questions, questions are multiple choices and you may
only mark ('click") one answer per question.
We greatly appreciate your kokua and ask that you please complete
the survey by Friday, June 29, 2012.
To access and complete the survey, please "click" on the link below.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CXC59XV
Aloha and Mahalo!,
Merit Appeal Board
ATT. B
You will remain anonymous! Survey responses are being collected and aggregated by a third party with survey results to
be forwarded to the Merit Appeals Board. Ronald Takahashi, Human Resources Director, will be given a numerical
summary of all responses, but will NOT be provided information concerning who responded or did not respond to the
survey, or what individual responses were given.
1. How effective is Human Resources at assisting you to do your job?
OExtremely effective
OVery effective
OModerately effective
OSlightly effective
ONot at all effective
2. How well does the Human Resources Director work with you and other members of
your staff?
OExtremely well
OVery well
OModerately well
OSlightly well
ONot at all well
3. How concerned about your questions were the Human Resources staff?
OExtremely concerned
OVery concerned
OModerately concerned
OSlightly concerned
ONot at all concerned
4. How well do the Human Resources staff answer your questions?
OExtremely well
OVery well
OModerately well
OSlightly well
0 Not at all well
5. How responsive are the Human Resources staff to your need(s)?
OExtremely responsive
OVery responsive
OModerately responsive
OSlightly responsive
ONot at all responsive
6. How quickly does Human Resources follow up on requests?
OExtremely quickly
OVery quickly
OModerately quickly
OSlightly quickly
ONot at all quickly
7. How accurate was the information provided to you by Human Resources?
OExtremely clear
OVery clear
OModerately clear
OSlightly clear
ONot at all clear
S. How knowledgeable is Human Resources about your department goals?
OExtremely knowledgeable
OVery knowledgeable
OModerately knowledgeable
OSlightly knowledgeable
ONot at all knowledgeable
9. How quickly does Human Resources adjust to changing priorities?
OExtremely quickly
OVery quickly
OModerately quickly
OSlightly quickly
0 Not at all quickly
10. Overall, are you satisfied with the service Human Resources provides?
OExtremely satisfied
OModerately satisfied
OSlightly satisfied
ONeither satisfied nor dissatisfied
OSlightly dissatisfied
OModerately dissatisfied
OExtremely dissatisfied
11. What does Human Resources need to do to improve its performance?
12. What changes would most improve service provided by Human Resources?
I
1. How did you first learn about the job(s) opportunities?
OCounty of Hawaii website
ODepartment
OFriend/Relative
OInternet
OMagazine
ONewspaper
ORadio Station
OSchool
OSpecial Publication
OTelevision
OUniversity/College
OOther
2. How user friendly is the web based recruitment system (i.e. - open an account, apply on
line, email notification of vacancies, etc)?
OExtremely friendly
OVery friendly
OModerately friendly
OSlightly friendly
ONot at all friendly
3. If you had direct contact with a County of Hawai'i employment representative(s) please
tell us who assisted you.
OCounty of Hawai'i Human Resources Department
ODepartment Representative
OOther
ATT. C
HANDOUT #C
4. How professional was the employment representative?
OVery professional
OProfessional
OSlightly professional
ONot applicable (Skip to question #7 if you checked not applicable)
5. How clearly did the representative explain the recruiting process?
OExtremely clearly
OVery clearly
OModerately clearly
OSlightly clearly
ONot at all clearly
6. What can we do to improve the recruiting process at the County of Hawai'i?
7. Overall, were you satisfied with the recruiting process at our company, neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied with it, or dissatisfied with it?
OExtremely satisfied
OModerately satisfied
OSlightly satisfied
ONeither satisfied nor dissatisfied
OSlightly dissatisfied
OModerately dissatisfied
OExtremely dissatisfied
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
FISCAL YEAR EVALUATION
(assignment of survey question to performance category)
July 1, 2011 — June 30, 2012
Employee Name: Ronald Takahashi
Performance Category
Rating
Meets or Does Not Meet
Goal #1
Performance Indicators for functional areas in HR
Goal #2
Executed union agreements & represent Mayor at negotiations
Goal #3
Feedback from other Department Directors including HR support
with classification and organization analysis
Financial Management
Attentive to financial budgets and controls, and generally
operates within prescribed financial limits. Budget overruns are
infrequent, and causes are normally identified and justified.
Implements plans to control cost where possible. Effective in
managing fiscal resources.
Planning, Prioritizing and Organizing
1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12
Prioritizes assignments satisfactorily to minimize crisis situations;
shows foresight to prevent potential problems in developing
contingency work plans for short and/or long-range plans;
identifies and utilizes resources and personnel effectively
develops goals of the department consistent with the mission of
the county; proposes and reviews benchmarks to monitor work
progress and follows up on assignments.
Problem Solving/Decision Making
2, 3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12
Understands issues; identifies and clearly defines problems as
they occur; accumulates and analyzes relevant information; uses
judgment to select workable solutions to problems' presents
alternative solutions when making recommendations;
understands ramifications to individual and organization.
Leadership
3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12
Effectively motivates to accomplish tasks and develop
employees. Takes action to solve problems. Maintains a good
method of sharing information with superiors and subordinates.
Overall Rating Meets Expectations Does Not Meet Expectations
Evaluator Signature:
Revised 11/16/11
ATT_ D
COUNTY OF HAWAI'I - DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Mission Statement and Goals
Mission Statement:
To be the employer of choice within the County and Island of Hawaii by
encouraging and supporting all efforts to nurture a healthy, safe, and rewarding
work environment and community. As the human resource team, we are quality
driven and committed to sharing our expertise with departments and employees
to enable them to better accomplish their missions.
Principle Goal:
Be an integral part of the County of Hawai'i strategic planning process which
defines the direction or strategy upon which decisions are made to allocate
resources, including its capital and people. We serve as the County's resource
for education related to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and expedite
resolution of complaints with regard to and based on applicable civil rights and
other laws. We strive to attract and retain individuals committed to our mission
statement.
FY 2011-2012 Goal
Performance Measures
* Continue with implementation of
Performance indicators and measures for
departmental reorganization plan that
each of the functional areas of HR shall not
promotes doing more with less. Move
change from previous year despite the
away from "specialized" functions
reduction in the number of personnel and
towards a "generalist" concept that
reorganization of the department. Measures
will allow for more flexibility in
include:
assignments. (Address two recent
1. Labor Relations - Hear and respond to
unanticipated vacancies, and two
employer -level grievances within 60 days
additional anticipated vacancies.)
from receipt.
2. Personnel & Organizational Development
- Conduct a new hire orientation class
once every two months.
Classification and Pay - Review and
process time from date of receipt:
• Position redescription reviews within 5
workdays
• Reallocations for recruitment within 10
workdays
3. Administrative Services - Audit and
approve properly completed and
submitted payroll certification forms within
five workdays of receipt, within two weeks
for mass pay adjustments.
4. Recruitment and Examination - Establish
eligible lists within the following timelines:
• Written examination required
09/21/11 1
R. Takahashi
* Complete negotiations for new
collective bargaining agreements
effective 711111 - 06/30/13 (and
supplemental agreements as required)
with UPW, HFFA, and SHOPO.
Represent the Mayor at negotiations;
provide Mayor with timely and
appropriate recommendations;
provide all necessary technical
support.
* Support and participate in the
Administration's budgetary process,
addressing concerns related to labor
cost, organizational structures, and
position management. Facilitate
Personnel Review Committee (PRC
makes appropriate recommendations
on the filling of positions)' provide
permanent position reallocation and
reorganization analysis and
recommendations; provide
recommendations in all areas of
human resource management.
09/21/11
R. Takahashi
• 2 months - small/medium
recruitment
• 3 months - large recruitment
• Open Competitive without written
exam - 2 months.
• Police Recruit with written exam and
performance test - 4 months.
5. Health and Safety - Conduct reviews of at
least 50 workers compensation claims per
quarter. Coordinate and/or conduct
safety inspections of at least 6 County
facilities.
6. Equal Opportunity - Respond to and
resolve inquiries and complaints from the
public and employees regarding various
civil rights laws within 14 days from date
received unless extensive
research/investigation is warranted.
1. As evidenced by fully executed
agreements (master and/or
supplemental)
2. Performance feedback from the Mayor.
1. Requests reviewed by the PRC shall be
accompanied with a classification
analysis and recommendation - 95%
threshold.
2. Number of permanent position
reallocation requests received annually
that were responded to with
recommendation - 95% threshold.
3. Reorganization requests that were
received and were responded to with
recommendation - 95% threshold.
Performance feedback from Department
Directors
2
HUMAN RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT SUMMARY
Mission Statement
To be the employer of choice within the County and Island of Hawaii by encouraging
and supporting all efforts to nurture a healthy, safe, and rewarding work environment and
community. As the human resource team, we are quality driven and committed to
sharing our expertise with departments and employees to enable them to better
accomplish their missions.
Department Goals
1. To provide names of qualified individuals to hiring departments on a timely basis for
the filling of their civil service vacancies.
2. To provide a classification and pay system that ensures an equitable compensation system.
3. To provide timely advice and assistance to all County agencies consistent with
applicable laws affecting human resource management.
4. To identify County training needs and provide training and personnel development
programs that will enhance the skills of County employees, provide a safe working
environment, and, ensure compliance with applicable laws affecting human resource
management.
5. To recognize County employees for their accomplishments.
6. To support the Merit Appeals Board and the Salary Commission with their duties and
functions.
7. To develop, implement, and maintain appropriate policies, procedures, and reports
required by law or by operational needs.
8. To negotiate and provide adjustments in wages, hours, and terms and conditions of
employment for County employees.
9. To identify and pursue appropriate changes in law, rules, contracts, policies and
procedures affecting human resource management.
10. To identify and reduce/eliminate unsafe and hazardous working conditions and work
practices in an effort to reduce the number of work place injuries and illnesses.
11. To process workers' compensation claims with respect and compassion for injured
workers, the ultimate goal of which is to return employee to his or her regular full
employment as a productive worker.
Funding Source and Position Count
General Fund $ 1,915,916 General Fund 49
Grant Revenue - Grant Revenue / Other 1
Total Budget: $ 1,915,916 Total Number of Positions 50
108 JL._ ATT. E
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Department Goals (continued)
12. To ensure departments and agencies are in compliance with applicable laws affecting
human resource; management.
13. To assist, encourage, and insure, County compliance with laws, rules, and policies
relative to equal opportunity and employment.
Program Description
The Department of Human Resources is the central human resource agency for the
County of Hawaii whose functions include administering the civil service laws as they
apply to the County. As the central human resource agency for the County, the
department has responsibility for strategic planning, workforce planning and
employment, equal opportunity, personnel development, compensation and benefits,
employee and labor relations, and occupational health and safety.
Program Objectives
Classification and Pay
1. Review and process position redescription reviews within five workdays of receipt.
2. Review and process reallocations for recruitment within 10 workdays of receipt.
Labor Relations
1. Hear and respond to employer -level grievances within 60 days from receipt.
2. Answer all writ=ten departmental inquiries relating to the administration and
interpretation of all collective bargaining agreements and executive orders within 14
days from date of receipt if it does not require inter jurisdictional action, 30 days if it
does.
3. Provide background and other technical information required by the Corporation
Counsel's Office for the arbitration of grievances within 14 days from the date of
request.
Personnel and Organizational Development
1. Conduct the New Hire Orientation class once a month.
2. Annually conduct each module in the Customer Service Skills Series.
3. Annually conduct each module in the Supervisory Skills Series.
4. Annually coordinate the Prevention of Workplace Violence training program.
5. By September 30, 2014, hold the annual Pre -retirement Workshop.
6. Issue the Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 Training Catalogues.
109
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Program Objectives (continued)
Equal Opportunity
1. Respond to and resolve inquiries and complaints from the public and Hawaii County
employees regarding various civil rights laws within 14 days from date received
unless extensive research/investigation or action/information from other departments
is required to properly respond to the inquiries and complaints.
2. By June 30, 2015 develop a draft of an Internal Investigations Manual to be used as a
reference for those conducting Internal Investigations.
3. By June 30, 2015, deliver 2 supervisory training classes, 2 non -supervisory training
classes and 2 Ally classes (sensitivity training for a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and
Transgender Inclusive workplace).
Administrative Services
1. Conduct two department/agency audits each quarter on personnel files, temporary
assignment records, postings, etc. to ensure compliance with personnel laws, rules,
policies and procedures, collective bargaining agreements and executive orders.
2. With the exception of mass pay adjustments transactions, audit and approve properly
completed and submitted payroll certification forms within five workdays of receipt.
Audit and approve mass pay adjustment payroll certification forms within two weeks
of the last form received.
3. Review and act upon properly completed and submitted Flexible Spending Plan
change in status forms within two workdays of receipt.
4. By December 31, 2014, hold an annual employee awards program.
Recruitment and Examination
Establish eligible lists to assist hiring departments fill their vacancies:
• Within two months for registration recruitments and small/medium size open -
competitive recruitments requiring a written examination.
• Within three months for large size open -competitive recruitments requiring a
written examination.
• Within two months for open -competitive recruitments requiring a training and
experience evaluation (T&E).
• Within four months for the Police Officer I recruitment requiring a written
examination and a performance test.
110
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Program Objectives (continued)
Recruitment and ]Examination
2. Establish internal recruitment lists to assist hiring departments fill their vacancies:
• Within one month for internal recruitments within the department or internal
recruitments within the County.
3. Certify (refer) names from available eligible lists to hiring departments within four
workdays from receipt of the request for the list.
4. By October 31; 2014, coordinate the placement of Cooperative Vocational Education
(CVE) students within the County.
Health and Safety
1. Coordinate and/or conduct safety inspections of at least six County facilities.
2. Provide requested safety and equipment training within two months of original
request.
3. Provide two HIOSH-required training programs per quarter.
4. Provide at least six Defensive Driver Courses (DDC) to County employees during the
fiscal year.
5. Conduct a semi-annual workers compensation claims review.
Program Highlights
Collaborated with affected departments and conducted maintenance reviews for the
following classes and series of work. Verified duties and minimum qualification
requirements, and amended classes as appropriate.
Customer Service Supervisor Fire Equipment Operator
Investigator Mass Transit Administrator
Parking Control Officer Police Evidence Specialist
Police Lieutenant
Police Officer III
Purchasing Agent
Police Major
Police Radio Dispatcher
Recreation Specialist
• Assisted the Finance Department in addressing staffing requirements to implement
Act 10, SB2506 SD2 HD1, which consolidated the driver's license and civil
identification .programs for the State of Hawai `i, which was then delegated to the
Counties. Transferred positions, reallocated positions to appropriate classifications,
and allocated new positions.
111
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Program Highlights (continued)
• Collaborated with other jurisdictions and the Department of Public Works to
implement Act 208, Session Laws of Hawaii 2010, that requires employees acting in
a guard capacity to be registered as a guard with the State of Hawai `i Board of Private
Detectives and. Guards. Assisted with registration requirements and amended class
specification to address qualification requirements of Act 208.
• Collective bargaining negotiations resulted in two-year master agreements for
bargaining units 02, 03, and 04 and a four-year master agreement for bargaining unit
01.
• Hosted BU 11 interest arbitration at the West Hawaii Civic Center in March 2013.
Human Resources Manager served as the Employer Group panel representative
during the arbitration.
• Drafted and issued Executive Order #158 which was the first comprehensive review
of negotiated terms and conditions of employment applicable to employees excluded
from collective bargaining, including elected and appointed officials in over 20 years.
• Coordinated and hosted 71 training sessions to 756 County employees on subjects
such as new hire orientation, prevention of workplace violence, drug and alcohol
awareness, customer service skills, supervisory skills, conflict resolution, and various
webinars on leadership topics.
• Organized the review and payment to eight applicants a combined $15,000 in tuition
reimbursement
• Based upon a consumer's request, funded improvements to University Heights Park
including a curb cut, an accessible parking space, and accessible water fountain.
• Funded the purchase of assistive equipment to enhance accessibility for Honoka`a
Swimming Pool.
• Funded the purchase of software to improve website accessibility for people with
disabilities. Haired a contract employee to assist departments and conduct hands-on
website accessibility training.
• Coordinated County's Leave Sharing Program: 5 requests for shared leave hours
were approved; 50 employees donated 1,160 hours of vacation leave.
112
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Program Highlights (continued)
Facilitated Flexible Spending Plan: As a cafeteria plan under section 125 of the
Internal Revenue Service Code, the County's Flexible Spending Plan allows
participants to pay for health insurance premiums and medical and dependent care
expenses with pretax dollars. As a result, participants realize both state and federal
income tax savings as well as FICA tax savings. In Plan Year 2012-2013, the County
saved approximately $447,645 in FICA taxes. During this period, 1,960 employees
participated in the plan.
• In its second "live" year, the County's electronic recruitment system received 8,277
applications for 108 open -competitive recruitments, 102 internal recruitments, and
various other appointments.
• Assisted departments in filling their vacancies by referring 391 qualified applicant
lists for a total of 325 permanent and temporary appointments.
• Developed and implemented new procedures for the filling of civil service and
exempt classified positions in the executive branch of the County to manage the
appropriate staffing of County positions.
• Coordinated island wide influenza vaccines with KTA for County employees,
vaccinating 43.8 employees.
• Secured additional funding from a Federal Emergency Management Agency/Civil
Defense (FEN/.[A/CD) grant and was able to purchase an additional 5 cabinet mounted
AED's and 8 portable automated external defibrillators (AED's) for distribution and
loan to County facilities and operations.
• Open workers' compensation claims increased from 292 open claims in FY 2011-12
to 373 open claims in FY 2012-13; and new claims increased from 136 claims being
filed in FY 2011-12 to 148 claims filed in FY 2012-13.
113
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Program Expenditures
Personnel Position Summary
Position Title
FY 2012-13
Actual
FY 2013-14
Budget
FY 2014-15
Request
Number of Positions
51
50
50
Salaries and Wages
1,371,935.61
1,498,511
1,585,967
Operations
219,189.32
332,897
328,345
Equipment
19,187.621,850
1
1,604
Program Total
1,610,312.55
1,833,258
1,915,916
Personnel Position Summary
Position Title
FY 2012-13
Authorized
FY 2013-14
Authorized
FY 2014-15
Request
Director of Human Resources
1
1
1
Deputy Director of Human Resources
1
1
1
Administrative Services Officer II
1
1
1
Clerk III
2
1
1
Employee Development Specialist
1
-
-
Equal Opportunity Officer
1
1
1
Equipment O erations Instructor (Temporary)
2
2
2
Human Resources Assistant
2
3
3
Human Resources Manager II
3
4
4
Human Resources Manager III
I
1
1
Human Resources Program Specialist
2
2
2
Human Resources Sp ecialist 1
3
3
3
Human Resources Specialist 11
1
1
1
Human Resources Technician 1
2
2
1
Human Resources Technician I1
3
3
4
Safety & Driver Improvement Supervisor
1
-
-
Secretary -Reporter
1
1
1
Student Helper I
1
1
1
Workers' Com ensation Claims Specialist 111
2
2
2
Workers' Com ensation Position
20
20
20
Total
51
50
50
115
HUMAN RESOURCES
HUMAN RESOURCES
Program Measures
* Personnel and Organizational Development (POD)
** Includes 84 reallocations for recruitment purposes
114
FY 2012-13
Actual
FY 2013-14
Budget
FY 2014-15
Estimate
No. of Positions
Permanent Full -Time
2,714
2,712
2,745
Permanent Part -Time
205
205
204
Temporary Full -Time
261
264
264
Temporary Part -Time
11
11
11
Total No. of Positions
3,191
3,192
3,224
Applications Reviewed
8,277
8,500
8,500
Recruitments Conducted
210
100
0
Internal Recruitments Conducted
0
0
100
Open Competitive Recruitments Conducted
0
0
105
Examinations Administered
105
96
102
Certifications Com leled
391
210
350
Personnel Transactions Processed
2,917
4,000
4,000
FSP Change Forms Reviewed/Processed
193
250
250
No. of POD* Trainin 7 Programs Offered
44
6
40
No. of POD Training Sessions Conducted
71
30
60
No. of Employees Wlio Attended POD Training
756
300
500
CVE Students Placed
14
15
15
Initial Allocations
2
3
4
Reallocations
217**
175
206
New Classes
5
5
7
Position Redescription Reviews
127
130
130
Class Specification Amendments
38
20
39
Step 3 Grievances Heard
18
25
20
No. of Cases Arbitrated
2
0
0
Merit Appeals Board Meetings
2
12
12
Merit Appeals Board Hearings
0
8
6
Salary Commission Meetings
1
6
6
Tool Testing
2
2
2
Monthly Reports -Accidents
12
12
12
Safety Inspections
24
6
6
Medical Bills Processed
3,804
4,000
4,000
First Aid Classes — Trained Employees
138
100
100
Driver Training & Equipment ment (No. of Employees)
27
25
25
* Personnel and Organizational Development (POD)
** Includes 84 reallocations for recruitment purposes
114