July 11, 2008

Ax city's Personnel Appeals Board?

Whatever the Personnel Appeals Board may be, it's safe to say it isn't busy.
City Councilor Frank Nicastro said the panel hasn't met in at least 12 years.
Personnel Director Diane Ferguson and Richard Lacey, a city attorney, said there was a time when it tried to have a meeting, but members couldn't get a quorum so the session never happened.
Nicastro said that the Salary Committee - which consists of three city councilors -- should look into taking over the functions of the appeals board to simplify city government.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yah, real big savings there Frank.

And letting Ferguson get her hands in the pie is certainly going to cost us!!!

Anonymous said...

YEah right, elected officials (who either work for the city, retired from the city, or are related to city workers) handling all appeals for city personnel???

Anonymous said...

Way to go Frank!

Anonymous said...

and you keep electing and reelecting him so who is stupid - duh - thinl it might be you?

Sue Gorski said...

The Personnel Appeals Board would only meet if a non-union salaried employee had a problem that they couldn't solve through the City's Personnel department. If an employee can't get satisfaction from the Personnel Director, nine times out of ten they would hire an attorney to represent them. If an attorney is hired, the employee would not be able to go before the Personnel Appeals Board. Whenever a non-bargaining employee has legal representation, the matter would then be turned over to Corporation Council or an attorney of the City's choice. I "served" on the Personnel Appeals Board for two terms and never had one meeting. I know that some on the board were well-versed in human resources matters and others were not. There were literally no meetings ever held and no training was ever given in how to deal with any personnel matter that might arise. An untrained board who meets with a disgruntled City employee could make matters much worse if a board member said or did something that was not legally copestetic. The appointed board members are representing the City and the advice they give or the words they choose to use in dealing with the employee are very important and subject to future lawsuits. It is my feeling that if this board is deemed to be necessary, then some type of training should be given to those who do not work in the human resources or legal field. I'm not talking about paid training - more on the level of legal do's and don'ts handouts or a session by someone who's well-versed in personnel matters. I also feel that intermittent meetings should be held to discuss appropriate measures that could be taken if a problem did arise. That way the board members would actually know each other and would not be scrambling if they were called into service.

Anonymous said...

This is why Sue Gorski got voted out of the DTC by Art Ward and Eliott Nelson's takeover.

Anonymous said...

That'll show you.

Don't mess with Art Ward!

Anonymous said...

You say Sue Gorski got ousted from the DTC because of Art & Elliot, how about the Pasquale's who worked thier butts off from day one for Art, I understand that was the evil task of Ellen Zoppo. Is she still ot talking to Artie? Is he going to her fund raiser at her house? Bunch of back stabers.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand the comment that says Sue Gorski was voted off the DTC because of her comments. Her explanation of what the board is supposed to do sounded pretty intelligent to me. Is that why she was voted off -- because Ward doesn't want people around who are actually competent?