This Issue's Articles:

On Point by Gil Moreno
County Board of Supervisors Puts Expansion Question Before Voters
by Alan Clayton
"Chaves Honored"
Feliz Dia de los muertos

From the President
Amy Gutierrez

We hope that by the time you are reading this, the county and the unions will have reached an agreement and a fair deal.

Public service should not mean a vow of poverty, but fair wages for County employees.

Please review the article below on Measure A. This is a political issue that the CEA has been involved in a long time, particularly through the efforts of Alan Clayton. The measure will greatly affect our communities. It is important that you get out and vote, and encourage all those who work with you to vote.

On Point
by
Gil Moreno
An issue that I’ve come across frequently in the course of representing CEA members involves promotions.

What’s it take to get promoted?

One thing you must do is work hard at getting credit for what you do in writing on your Performance Evaluations. Typically, an employee will apply for a position and take an examination that consists of a ratings from records and an appraisal of promotability (AP).

Say both the components are weighed equally at 50%. Then let’s suppose you get a 90 on the ratings from records but a 70 on the AP. You end up with an overall score of 80, which would leave you in Band 4 of the eligibility list for the position. (Add them and divide by two and, presto, you’ve got your score.) Generally, you may not be “reachable” or eligible for an appointment if everyone and his uncle are ahead of you in Bands 1 to 3.

You have to ask yourself: Why a 70 on the AP? That’s where PE’s come into play. The rater usually looks at the last three years. If you were rated competent overall and standard in the categories for quality, quantity, and so on, then there’s not a lot of room for argument that you deserve a higher score. The competent ratings on the PE’s average out to a 70 on the AP.

There are a lot of nuances that can affect a score. But my point is that it helps to get as many pluses and overall very goods (or higher) on PE’s.

Obviously, it’s not as simple as it sounds. But it doesn’t get any easier if you want to protest your exam score.

What is especially galling is that a lot of you have worked for a department for 15 or 20 years or more. And during exam appeals, supervisors agree that, yes, you’re a great employee and it’s true, you did all these extra projects and you’re the go-to person for a job but it’s not in writing in the PE’s.

If management is playing dirty pool, we’ll look into that. But supervisors retire. The guy who was a sleazy supervisor and who did you in for a promotion because of a complaint you filed 5 years ago is gone. There’s no record, only recollections.

The record that does exist consists of your PE’s and prior AP scores.

So don’t get left behind the eight ball. And always, always, go and review your exam scores within the 10-day period that you’re allowed to do so. Look at the eligibility list once it comes out and find out how many persons are in the band ahead of you, if any, and how many are in the band that you’re in. Take notes.

The standard for appeals, from the County’s Department of Human Resources’ view, is whether management made an “error” in your rating and scoring. Management rarely will concede it made an error. And if the record is thin, the prospects for prevailing on an appeal are thin also. So get the credit you deserve in your PE’s.... ....On the flip side of promotions, you might say, are cases involving discipline. Keep in mind that sometimes things don’t start out looking as if they’ll lead to discipline. Maybe it’s the law of unintended consequences.

Here’s what I mean. The following is based on a trial that is before the civil service commission.

In November 1999, a nearly 10-year employee and CEA member, Ricardo Leal (not his real name) finds out that his mother is suffering from cancer. Shortly thereafter, he mentions this to his coworker and, on another occasion, to his supervisor during conversations at work.

Leal has an impeccable work record but, abruptly, in early December, he is removed from his acting supervisory position. Someone had complained about him. In a meeting, he is called on the carpet and summarily removed. During the meeting, he requests 2 weeks of vacation so that he can care for and spend time with his mother. His supervisor says he doesn’t think there’ll be a problem with the vacation request.

While out on a sick day, Leal calls in to ascertain whether his vacation time has been granted in writing. The timekeeper tells him that the supervisor looked at his vacation request on his desk and said, “I can’t approve this. I’ll have to talk to him.”

Frustrated and upset and suspecting that the supervisor is playing games, Leal hangs up with the timekeeper and calls his supervisor directly. He tells his supervisor that he wants to quit because he wants to take care of his mother and spend time with her because her cancer diagnosis is terminal.

The supervisor asks him if he is sure he wants to quit. Leal says yes. His supervisor tells him to come in and talk to him when he comes in to turn in his keys. End of conversation.

You might wonder what was going through the employee’s mind as well as why wouldn’t the supervisor tell the employee about the state or federal family leave act. Hold those thoughts.

Leal wasn’t in a hurry to see his supervisor. Two months later, he wondered why no one from the department had contacted him regarding the county keys in his possession. So he calls the personnel department and finds out that the department had placed him on “U-time,” or as absent without authorization. His resignation was ineffective until he signed a form stating that he had resigned.

His once impeccable work record is now ruined, he figures. His chances of being rehired by the county are ruined as well, he concludes. That is, he had thought that if he quit and took care of his mother until her last day, he could then apply again with the county. Or find work elsewhere because he had a good work record.

Instead, he further learned that the department intended to fire him for not following its rules and regulations, namely, being away from work without authorization for around 3 months.

In March 2000, Leal was allowed to return to work for the purpose of attending a pre-disciplinary hearing known as a Skelly hearing, where an employee is allowed to explain, deny or rebut the charges against him. In short, the department let him return to fire him.

And Leal was fired on April 6, 2000. In the department’s written response to the Skelly, the department claims that his supervisor told Leal about the family leave act but Leal wasn’t interested.

At the civil service hearing, though, the supervisor admitted that he had never brought up the family leave act.

And he made another significant admission on cross-examination: A few years back, another employee vanished for about 4 months, or 500 hours. He just upped, as they say. No one knew where he was or why he was gone. He didn’t call in. But then he showed up and went back to work.

The supervisor testified he recommended discharging that employee but admitted that nothing happened to him despite being absent without authorization—no discipline whatsoever. He returned to work as though nothing had happened and remains working to this day. In fact, he took over the supervisory position that Leal had held prior to being removed.

With other employees, the supervisor further testified that he had referred them to or allowd them to participate in the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) if they had a problem that counseling might alleviate. Not Leal, though.

California and Federal law allow an employee the right to take up to 12 weeks of leave each year if needed due to the birth of a child, the employee’s inability to work because of illness and to care for a parent or a spouse who has a serious health condition.

Why Leal wasn’t able to benefit from the law is what’s at stake in trial. Did he face a false choice? Stay tuned. The hearing continues in November and perhaps in December or early next year we’ll know the outcome. Be cool.