NORFOLK
City Manager Regina V.K. Williams wants to alter Norfolk's grievance policy so employees would no longer be allowed to get punishments reversed that were imposed because of allegations of poor performance or wrongdoing.
The proposal, which was scheduled for a City Council vote last month but postponed, has angered many among the nearly 5,000 who work for the city.
It would strip the authority of grievance boards to overturn punishments handed down by supervisors when they find an employee has violated a policy.
The panels currently hear evidence, much like a court, and have the power to exonerate an employee or reduce punishments such as demotions, firings and suspensions, even if they find an employee has done something wrong.
Taking away the authority to reduce punishments is necessary, Williams said, because the panels' judg ments should not supersede decisions made by management.
Some employees say the proposal would give city managers too much control.
"Unacceptable," said Mike McKenna, who heads the police union.
Andrew Sacks, an attorney who has represented employees, said the changes would violate state law. Virginia law mandates that all cities and counties have a grievance procedure for employees that includes a panel to review allegations of wrongdoing. Sacks said he think s the code also grants panels the right to reverse punishments.
"I think they'll end up in court over this, and they'll lose," Sacks said.
Norfolk's grievance panels include three people. One is selected by the employee, one by the city, and the third is a lawyer chosen by the other two members.
Most of the grievance appeals involve the police, said Nancy Olivo, the director of human resources.
Williams said three police officers who had been fired were found by grievance panels to have violated rules, but were given their jobs back by the panels. Williams had recommended that they be fired.
"So the officer who a panel agrees has done something wrong comes back to work," she said. "What kind of message does that send to everyone else?"
Employees should have the right to challenge decisions, said Mike Imprevento, a lawyer who has represented employees in grievance hearings. Police Chief Bruce P. Marquis and Williams are not omniscient, he said.
"These panels are chaired by attorneys who have a sense of fairness," he said.
Under the proposed change, even if a panel finds punishment was based on erroneous assumptions, it has to be upheld, Imprevento said.
"Things sometimes get distorted up the chain of command and an employee is out of a job. Sometimes a panel hears evidence that the city wasn't aware of."
Imprevento said in the last year, Marquis has refused to put officers back on the street after they were reinstated by grievance panels.
Imprevento says he is contemplating a lawsuit to force Marquis to reinstate one officer to full duty.
McKenna of the police union said state code gives panels the right to review punishments for good reason.
"It's like someone being charged with murder, and a jury finds him guilty of manslaughter instead," he said. "The punishment is not the same for both charges, yet the city doesn't want panels to have any discretion over punishment.
"Regina Williams wants the ultimate power to fire you with no questions asked."
Other South Hampton Roads' cities have grievance procedures similar to Norfolk. Virginia Beach, Portsmouth and Chesapeake nearly always abide by decisions made by the panels, Imprevento and Sacks said.
Suffolk often rejects decisions by grievance panels and appeals them to the Circuit Court, Imprevento said.
Norfolk's council has not discussed the city manager's proposal, but has been hearing from employees.
"I'll wait until the briefing to make up my mind," Councilman W. Randy Wright said. "But anytime you talk about making the police chief more powerful, it's a concern."
McKenna and others say they are furious at what they say was an effort to slip the change past them. The council was scheduled to vote on the ordinance in late June, but after McKenna learned of the vote, he called Wright and Councilman Barclay C. Winn to protest. The vote was delayed.
"We had no idea it was coming," McKenna said.
Olivo says employees were kept apprised of the proposed changes.
Williams said she asked Olivo to meet with about 15 employee representatives to find out what their objections were.
Employees generally approve of most of the proposed changes, such as a request to speed up the hearings by limiting postponements and allowing testimony by telephone, said Jane Bethel, vice president of the city's employee union, which has about 150 members.
She said the employees who attended the meeting unanimously opposed the limitation on grievance panels to alter punishments.
Williams said she plans to stick to her position.
"I've been very clear with them that this in no way changes my mind," she said. "At the end of the day, this proposal will come forward again."
Pilot writers Dave Forster, Jen McCaffery and Mike Saewitz contributed to this report.
Harry Minium, (757) 446-2371, harry.minium@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
City Manager
As a 60 year resident of Norfolk, I am eagerly awaiting the time when the citizens of Norfolk can say, "At the end of the day"....Ms. Williams is no longer the Norfolk City Manager.
At best, she has been a poor city manager.
Once again the Norfolk City
Once again the Norfolk City Government feels they are above the law and have no responsibilty to the citizens or employees of Norfolk.
Thank God for the oversight of the courts....
Bad practice
I think this would be a bad business practice that may end up costing the city much more in court expenses and lawsuits... but then again what else is new for Norfolk?
Grievance
I sit on these grievance proceedings. Most of the time the city is so far off base it is criminal in itself. What takes place most of the time is that the panel finds out that the most serious infraction did not occur the way the management says. But the employee has violated a lesser procedure; that is why it gets reduced. It is plan to see that your City Manager wants to have all the power and make decision that effect people and their families without looking for the truth, or to be fair
Grievance Value
If the grievance panel's decision is not to be enforced, why bother. Without the grievance panel the employee is subject to too many variables that can be used to determine his/her fate. For instance, if politics plays a factor an employee could be fired because management took the easy way out. Personality can also be used to determine the employees fate along with race, sex, religion, and the list goes on. The grievanve procedure allows the employee the opportunity to share their side without the distortion that comes through chain of command. A panel is a great way to have outsiders review both sides of the incident to determine if the correct punishment was given. Perhaps City Manager Williams should be terminated to see if her value of the grivance procedure remains the same.
Grievance board is necessary
The grievance board is a necessary tool to ensure that discipline is not being applied in an inequitable manner. In a large organization(a city) it is not uncommon for one employee to be punished more severely than another for the same infraction, such as tardiness. All it takes is a supervisor that for some reason dislikes an employee and the employee loses his/her job. The grievance panel is a safeguard against such behavior. Regina Williams is disgruntled because she is not always successful when she wants to fire people for little or no justification. It shows how capable she is at making poor decisions.
A grievance panel is a
A grievance panel is a protection for employees to prevent arbitrary and capricious punishments.
It allows cooler heads to prevail, all the evidence to be presented including previous employee evaluations, as well as any other reprimands or accomadations.
I have seen and experienced politics in the work place, and it can be ugly, jeopardizing the employee's job and career. It is a morale buster. Reaching a supervisory position does not ensure good management skills. I have witnessed employees who had outstanding performance evaluations under one supervisor, but who were deemed unfit by another.
This is an example of why the Employee Free Choice Act is necessary. If the City Manager can try to slide this by, what would prevent the sliding through of other changes. Unions can be a dirty word to some, but a godsend to others.
The problem really is....
That 95% of the punishment handed down is often more severe than required so the board often lessens the punishment and the management is not happy with that....
The panel has one attorney who knows the law and often sides with the employee in the fact that the punishment was excessive. In any other legal proceeding there is a body that can review and adjust the punishment why shouldn't the grievance panel have that same right. Oh yeah has the current process not been in place before Mrs. Williams' arrival and no other City Manager has made an issue?
okkidder
I have seen it way to often that when a situation arises, the management has a knee jerk reaction and hands down a stiffer punishment then needed. Sometimes employees are fired for damage control. Other times, a punishment is much too harsh for what is said. Then again, sometimes a warning was never given to the employee and then terminated on the first mistake. I believe that the review board should have a strong voicce with the management. But, after all the information has been revieled by the board, I think that a team of unbiased managers within the employees department should take the councils recommendation and make a better decision of upholding the punishment, reducing it, or dropping it. No one is perfect and giving someone ultimate power to hire and fire without a means of appeal is unconstitutional. People still have ethical rights within any buisness.
Somewhat agree
It's not often I find myself agreeing with Regina on anything. I feel that grievance boards often soften up the issue for no particular reason other than feeling sorry for the individual and the situation. This puts the evil eye on the manager either for being too harsh, not having his facts right or just putting him or her through the routine and enjoying the overturning. It doesn't make for a good situation. Regardless a grievance is necessary to make sure everyone's on the same page and handle situations when they're not quite right. The power to overturn is necessary. The problem is it's too often done and for no apparent reason.