At the beginning of September, Council received a staff recommendation related to Policies and Procedures.
There were pages, all identified by number and title.They had been compiled over years.
Council had authority over all of them.
Some are administrative in nature. Requiring Council approval is not necessary.
Staff recommended specific policies by title and number remain under Council authority and the rest be delegated to the Chief Administrative Officer.
I acknowledged there was merit to the recommendation. I noted substance of the policies were not included. I considered it incumbent of Council to be aware of the nature of authority being delegated from Council
I noted we are at the end of a term of office. A new Council will be elected.
A workshop held with staff and new Councillors to determine which policies and why they should be delegated would be an excellent project for a new Council . It would provide a proper understanding of the line between political and administrative authority from the start.
Staff acceptance of my rationale was visible.
No matter, Council gave immediate approval to the recommendation.
I have information relevant to the issue.
Town policy provides two weeks vacation for the first five years of employment. Entitlement increases by a week every five years. It takes twenty years of employment to be entitled to six weeks vacation.
That's a chunk of time out of fifty-two weeks of payroll.
Recently I heard new hires have been given three weeks vacation to start. Vacation entitlement policy was Council's to decide. No authority was sought or given for a change.
Since the staff recommendation was approved to delegate authority.I understand vacation entitlement has been increased by a week from start of employment.
It means a change in entitlement all the way up the line.
Consider this; eight, fifteen year employees entitled to six weeks vacation, represents more than a person year employment on the payroll.
It may not mean an additional employee. It does mean a year's man hours not received. It means a financial impact. It may not be out of line with other municipalities employee benefits. It may be in line with town union employee benefits.
There may be many arguments to justify a change in policy.
What it is not, is within the authority of the administration to decide.
The elected body is accountable to taxpayers for the cost of service.
It was for Council to decide.
I suspect the Mayor was aware of the vacation entitlement issue. Whether the five followers were also,I cannot say.
It is a classic example of how the line between administration and the elected body has been scrubbed out of existence during this term.
It is also a propitious time for a cover-up.
NEW MORRIS CAMPAIGN SLOGAN
ReplyDeleteVENI, VIDI, VOMIT
There are no morals in this mayor.
ReplyDeleteEvelyn,
ReplyDeleteYou have chosen one particular policy here to discuss so I would like to comment on vacation entitlement.
Vacation entitlement is one of those "benefits" we all hear about that are outside of an employee's salary. 1 week of vacation pay is equal to 2% of the base salary. Benefits are one of the things that employees and potential employees look at to determine if a job is worth having or worth accepting. Like it or not, being paid not to work is a right in the work place.
In today's employment environment, you are seeing people with some long term tenure leaving a position (either on their own or being redundant/laid off/etc.). These people sometimes have significant vacation benefits in their pocket. To go from that job to a job with another employer that have a strict policy about 2 weeks for the first 5 years puts a question into their mind about the position.
I speak from this situation first hand. I have been employed steady since leaving college until late 2008. At that time I no longer had work and began looking for work. As you can imagine I had enjoyed a number of benefits - vacation entitlement was one. When I found another position, the hiring manager went to their HR department and his manager to change the offer of employment to include vacation entitlement to match what I had been used to. The reason given was that as a long-term employee (outside of the firm) I should be given benefits in line with employees with similar tenure and not be considered the same as some greenhorn out of college. He did this on his own - without my request.
My point in all of this is that in order to attract quality talent - you need to make the position as attractive as possible. A policy is fine, but latitude is required and re-visting the policy to keep competative is prudent.
We all know about the staff exodus.... I think this is a step towards making the jobs attractive enough to stay.
Fuimus