ORD-2008-105 - Third Part Representation in the Employee Disciplinary Process

Browse Search

,~ Laura Blackmon said that the personnel ordinance states that third parties may not be at pre-disciplinary meetings and the Board of County Commissioners asked for information about this issue. There is a chart in the packet that addresses this issue in other counties, and none of the counties allow third party representation. The staff also provided some models and options for third party representation. Staff is not recommending that the ordinance be changed. The biggest concern is that having third parties would make a more adversarial situation. Commissioner Carey said that he is happy that staff has moved beyond the constitutional right issue. He appreciated the three options and he would like to change the ordinance. He would support the first option, which is, "The employee is permitted to select a person of their choice to accompany them to the Pre-disciplinary Conference. This person is considered a support person only and is not allowed to participate in any way in the conference." He also thinks that the employees should be surveyed on this. Commissioner Gordon said she is concerned about creating an inequity between the State and County employees. Staff Attorney Annette Moore said that currently the rules do not allow attorneys to represent a State employee disciplinary proceeding. There is no mention of other people, just attorneys. She will go back to the Office of State Personnel and get more clarification. Commissioner Foushee said that she does support the first option instead of the second option. She has a problem with a trained Human Resources professional. If an employee is allowed to have a presence, then the employee should choose the form of that presence. Chair Jacobs said that this survey of counties in an anti-Union state is useless to him. He said that this environment is anti-worker from the State level. He thinks that the best option would be some part of 1 or some part of 2, where a trained mediator that is not part of County government would go in with the employee. A motion was made by Chair Jacobs to approve a hybrid of one and two, but make the representative a person who can speak, who is not an attorney, and who is a trained mediator from outside of County government. Human Resources Director Michael McGinnis said that the person would need to know Orange County's Human Resources disciplinary process. Commissioner Foushee said that if an employee is allowed to bring a presence with them, they should be able to choose who they want to bring in. Chair Jacobs said that he was suggesting that staff should have a list available of trained mediators just in case. Geof Gledhill suggested model one and the first sentence could read as it is. For the second sentence, the representative could be a family member, trained mediator, or another employee, but not an attorney. The last sentence is being changed to read that the person is considered a support person and is allowed to participate. Chair Jacobs agreed with this language, seconded by Commissioner Carey. Commissioner Nelson said that the mediator should be trained in human resources. Commissioner Nelson wanted to make a friendly amendment to the motion to change the language that the representative would be a trained HR mediator only. Commissioner Gordon said she that she would prefer to have this vetted more. She is not sure that all of the consequences are understood. The friendly amendment was not accepted.