Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Personnel Board - Meeting Date: 8/21/2013 CITY OF GLENDALE PERSONNEL BOARD HEARING EARL BABCOCK August 21,2013 @ 6:00 pm OPEN SESSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Westby, Chairperson Herbert Haley,Vice Chairperson Bud Zomok, Board Member Stephen Gilman, Board Member STAFF PRESENT: Jim Brown, HR&Risk Mgmt. Executive Director • Naomi Jackson,Human Resources Administrator Karen Doncovio, Human Resources Generalist LeJeune Boone,Human Resources Generalist Katie Douglas, Human Resources Generalist WITNESSES: Earl Babcock, Appellant ' Craig Johnson, Water Services Executive Director Lawrence Brotman,Utility Ops Superintendent Dawn Saxman, Water Services Administrator Joyce Borchert, Sr. Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Christina Parry, Asst. City Attorney Kerri Logan, Water Services Administrator Thomas Relucio, Sr. Management Assistant. David Hutchinson, Sr. Maintenance Mechanic Rocco Pontrelli, Sr. Instrument Technician Richard Levernier, Utilities Security Superintendent Darcie McCracken, Deputy City Clerk Donna Ford Terrell, RPR, RMR, RDR, CRR, Certified Court Reporter #50250, documented the record of the hearing. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL (Pages 4- 6) Richard Westby, Chairperson, called the Personnel Board Hearing to order at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 21, 2013. Roll call was taken. The Appellant was represented in Propria Persona. Craig Johnson, Water Services Executive Director, represented the Respondent, City of Glendale. ORDER OF PROOF (Page 7) The reading of the Order of Proof was waived by the Appellant and the Respondent. Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 2 PURPOSE OF HEARING The purpose of this hearing was to take testimony in the matter of the disciplinary appeal requested by Earl Babcock, Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor, regarding his suspension of employment. On April 18, 2013 this employee was served with a Notice of Intent to Suspend without Pay for Two (2) Work Days. On May 13, 2013, the employee was served a Notice of Suspension without Pay for Two (2) Work Days. Mr. Babcock's suspension from his position as Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor was based on his violation of City of Glendale Human Resources Policies and Procedures. Specifically, Mr. Babcock failed to meet performance standards in his position as a Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor. He demonstrated major performance deficiencies when he (1) misappropriated City property by parking his personal vehicle inside a city storage building for approximately 30 days without authorization, (2) demonstrated confrontational and unprofessional behavior on multiple occasions toward several staff members despite numerous verbal counselings to discontinue this behavior, and (3) was negligent and careless in his job performance. He circumvented the City's established purchase order process by placing two purchases on his procurement card (ProCard) rather than using the established purchase order as required by Materials Management. He also failed to submit these purchases for payment in a timely manner. Behavior such as this jeopardizes the City's efficient business practices and violates the trust placed in Mr. Babcock as a City of Glendale employee. His actions constituted major performance deficiencies in violation of City policy, including major insubordination and conduct unbecoming of a City employee, BACKGROUND Examples of Mr. Earl Babcock's substantiated major perfoimance deficiencies in violation of City policy include the following: 1 . Unauthorized Storage of Personal Vehicle in a City Building On Feb 28, 2013, Water Services Management was advised Mr. Babcock's personal vehicle, a blue pickup truck with license plate number HAV7, was parked inside a City storage building at the Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility (ARWRF) and had been stored there for approximately 30 days. The matter was investigated and several witnesses stated his personal vehicle had been parked for some time inside the storage building. When questioned about this, Mr. Babcock first stated his truck had been parked in the building for about a week, but he later admitted the vehicle had been parked inside the city building for approximately 30 days. When asked why he made the decision to store his personal vehicle in a city building, Mr. Babcock stated a little over a month ago he had driven his truck to work and later that day his wife picked him up to take him to an appointment. He further stated the next day he drove a different vehicle to and from work and he had planned to take his truck home as soon as he made arrangements for someone -2 - Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 3 to drop him off at work so he could drive his truck home. He stated he originally parked his truck in the employee parking lot, but a short time later work was being performed in the parking lot which necessitated his moving his truck from the parking space, at which time he made the decision to park it inside the maintenance storage building at ARWRF. When asked if Management provided approval to store his vehicle in the city building, Mr. Babcock indicated management had not given him permission to park the vehicle for an extended period on City property or to park the vehicle inside a City storage facility. Subsequent to his conversation with his supervisor, Mr. Babcock removed his vehicle from City premises. In Mr. Babcock's position as a Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor, he is in a role of leadership — one in which his staff looks to him to set the example. Storing his personal vehicle inside a City building for approximately 30 days without authorization was an inappropriate use of City property, and a violation of public trust. Mr. Babcock's actions are unacceptable and demonstrate poor judgment and decision making. 2. Confrontational and Unprofessional Behavior It was communicated to Mr. Babcock that his on-going insubordinate and disrespectful behavior, which has been directed toward City staff and supervision, is unacceptable and will no longer be tolerated. The following were several recent examples of Mr. Babcock's inappropriate behavior in the workplace which occurred over the last nine months,prior to his receiving discipline: a) In August 2012, Mr. Babcock was reported to have been adversarial and abusive in his treatment of the Water Services ProCard Administrator during his audit of Mr. Babcock staff's ProCard statements. When Mr. Babcock's staff members were asked to provide additional information and supporting documentation for their ProCard statements as required by City ProCard policy, Mr. Babcock informed the ProCard Administrator that the Water Services Department could go on without his help, but the department could not do without Mr. Babcock and his staff at ARWRF. Mr. Babcock went on to say that if he was not there to run the ARWRF, the facility would fail. Mr. Babcock asked the Administrator why he was being bothered with having to provide the requested information. According to the employee, the tone Mr. Babcock used with him was condescending and confrontational. b) On February 14, 2013, Mr. Babcock attended a meeting in which Water Services Management served one of his ARWRF staff with a Notice of Intent to Suspend. Prior to the meeting, Mr. Babcock was very vocal in stating he felt this action was not necessary and he did not support this level of discipline. However, based on identified performance deficiencies, Water Services Management made the decision to move forward with serving the disciplinary document. Before the meeting was convened, Mr. Babcock was pulled aside and reminded that a final decision had been reached and he was to support Management's decision -3 - Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 4 regarding this matter. After the meeting, Mr. Babcock's subordinate left the building, and in the same time frame, a fellow staff member entered the building as Mr. Babcock was exiting and he asked Mr. Babcock, "How are you doing?" at which time Mr. Babcock exclaimed, "Bullshit!" When he was questioned about his inappropriate outburst he claimed he was just making a general statement and it was not in reference to the disciplinary document served to his employee. Mr. Babcock's outburst, regardless of the reason, was inappropriate and unprofessional. c) On February 26, 2013, an administration staff member called Mr. Babcock to follow up on a request from his superintendent to provide information for the solicitation and answer several questions a vendor had regarding the estimated annual usage for the facilities he manages. In an email, Mr. Babcock's superintendent requested he provide the information to Administration the same day. At approximately 5:00 p.m. in a follow-up phone call with an administrative staff member regarding the requested information, Mr. Babcock was evasive and acted in an inappropriate and unprofessional manner by not assisting with the requested information. This went on for approximately twenty minutes during which time Mr. Babcock refused to supply the requested information. The supervisor who overheard the conversation directed her staff member to end the discussion with Mr. Babcock. He shortly followed up by sending two emails and calling the supervisor. In these communications he continued to display inappropriate and unprofessional behavior in his responses and was evasive in his answers. Eventually Mr. Babcock did provide the required information, but only after an unnecessary amount of time was wasted by him in his refusal to cooperate and provide the required information in a timely manner. Mr. Babcock's behavior was inappropriate and unprofessional. d) On March 13, 2013, Mr. Babcock attended an Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) Reporting meeting with other City of Glendale Water Services Department staff. Prior to the meeting, all plant supervisors, including Mr. Babcock, were instructed by email to provide specific data regarding their plant production to the Water Services Department Environmental Program Manager as a report was due within two weeks' time. This information is compiled annually by Water Services staff and submitted to ADWR as required by our permit. At the time of the meeting, all supervisors, except Mr. Babcock, had submitted the required information. His failure to submit the required information prevented staff from submitting the completed report to ADWR. During the meeting, he was again asked to provide the required information. In response Mr. Babcock stated, "In the past I wasn't required to provide this information." He further stated, "My responsibility ended with my staff entering plant data into the Arrowhead Access Database system." When the Program Manager stressed the importance of his providing the information within the two -4- Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 5 week deadline, he again stated, "Before I didn't have to do this. I just had to operate the plant." Mr. Babcock then stated, "I'll see what I can do about getting it to you,"but he never indicated whether or not he would provide the information in a timely manner. Several times during the course of the meeting Mr. Babcock stated, "I didn't used to have to do this. My job is to run the plant." "I'll see what I can do." Again, Mr. Babcock made no commitment to deliver the information quickly as needed. After the meeting, his superintendent called one of his staff and directed him to provide the required information, which he produced within minutes of the request. The attitude Mr. Babcock exhibited in the ADWR Reporting meeting held March 13, 2013, is an example of his disrespectful and uncooperative behavior. As a Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor, he is responsible to communicate and coordinate timely information about daily activities in support of plant operations to operators, maintenance mechanics, Public Service Representatives, other supervision, engineers and other utilities. Mr. Babcock's refusal to provide the requested information in a timely manner demonstrated major insubordination and is contrary to the goals of the Water Services Department. e) Mr. Babcock lost his temper and went on a rant, angrily stating he didn't deserve this and he threatened to quit his job. He then stated there were other employees at the Arrowhead facility who are close to retirement and he threatened to take them with him when he left because in his words "They were sick of being overworked and picked on." Mr. Babcock has been counseled on several occasions regarding his angry outbursts, inappropriate attitude and unprofessional behavior. Despite these counseling sessions, he continues to engage in this behavior. As a Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor,he is required to establish and maintain effective working relationships with his employees, other City Water Services Management Staff and the general public. Furthermore, as a Supervisor, Mr. Babcock should be facilitating solutions to the challenges facing the Water Services Department, rather than acting as a stumbling block. His continual verbal outbursts and unprofessional behavior must stop immediately. His actions demonstrate abusive attitude, language or conduct toward employees, a major,performance deficiency in violation of City policy. 3. Invoices and Purchase Order- Sodium Hypochlorite In reconciling the invoices and the purchase order with Hill Brothers Chemical Company for sodium hypochlorite it was found that two invoices dated May 18, 2012 and June 6, 2012, were paid with Mr. Babcock's City ProCard on August 28, 2013, instead of using the purchase order payment process as required. As Mr. Babcock was aware, the Materials Management Purchasing Process states "Non-Contract Purchases between $5,000 and $50,000 require the issuance of a purchase order." Mr. Babcock's use of his -5 - Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 6 ProCard to make the two purchases totaling $3,374.64, rather than the use of the Hill Brother's purchase order, was a violation of this requirement. In addition, the invoices were issued in the previous fiscal year and should have been submitted for payment in a timely manner. Paying invoices 72 and 30 days, respectively, after the due date is not acceptable and a discredit to the Water Services Department. As a member of Water Services Management in charge of an important Water Reclamation Facility with a budget of over two million dollars, Mr. Babcock is expected to manage every aspect of his budget, including purchase orders. Furthermore, as a Water Reclamation Facility Supervisor with eight years of experience at the City of Glendale,he is expected to understand and comply with the City's policies and procedures regarding ProCard purchases and purchase orders. Mr. Babcock is aware that preparing and monitoring his division budget, including purchase orders that are charged to his budget, is a primary function of his position. His decision to use his ProCard to pay for invoices that should have been paid through the established purchase order process demonstrates poor judgment and decision making and is a violation of the Materials Management purchasing process. Mr. Babcock's actions demonstrated major insubordination in violation of City policy. DISCIPLINARY HISTORY On February 20, 2013, Mr. Babcock received a Verbal Counseling regarding his inappropriate and unprofessional verbal outburst to a fellow staff member. On August 7, 2012, Mr. Babcock received a Verbal Counseling regarding his inappropriate and unprofessional behavior and treatment of the ProCard Administrator. On July 2, 2012, Mr. Babcock received a Memorandum of Expectation for inappropriately disclosing confidential legal information, as well as comments made by other staff members regarding on-going negotiations to an outside party. In September 2011, Mr. Babcock received a Verbal Counseling regarding the inappropriate tone and implications he made in an email he sent to Human Resources staff. On August 3, 2011, Mr. Babcock received a Verbal Counseling regarding his inappropriate and unprofessional response to an email sent by the Security Superintendent. POLICY VIOLATIONS Mr. Babcock's actions/performance were in violation of the following Human Resources Policies & Procedures, and did not meet the purchase order requirements of the City of Glendale Materials Management Department. -6- i Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 7 No. 504—Employee Conduct Section I Employees shall at all times conduct themselves in a way that reflects favorably on the public they serve. The City upholds, promotes and demands the highest standards of ethics from all of its employees. Employees should maintain the utmost standards of personal integrity, truthfulness, honesty and fairness in carrying out their public duties, avoid any improprieties in their roles as public employees, and never use their City position or power for improper personal gain. All employees are expected to respect and comply with all federal, state and local laws, including all municipal policies, rules, regulations, directives and procedures. No. 513—Disciplinary Policy Serious Deficiencies These are acts not involving any question of trust or honesty. They do not pose a threat to the orderly City operations and they do not endanger the health, welfare, or safety of employees or other individuals. These deficiencies should normally be handled through corrective disciplinary actions. • Minor Insubordination ➢ Disrespect toward supervisory or other authority ➢ Disorderly conduct causing disruption of work unit or task Major Deficiencies These acts involve questions of trust or honesty, constitute a threat to the orderly City operations or pose a threat to the health, welfare or safety of employees or other individuals. • Continued performance deficiencies after previous disciplinary action • Major Insubordination ➢ Disobedience or refusal to obey a reasonable order or direction • Conduct unbecoming of a City employee ➢ Abusive attitude, language or conduct,toward employees or the public ➢ On or off duty conduct which may bring discredit to employees of the City • Negligence or careless job performance • Misappropriation,theft or conversion of property belonging to, or in the possession of, the City, an employee, or the public Materials Management Purchases from $5,000 to $50,000 -7- Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 8 Non-Contract Purchases-Purchases between$5,000 and$50,000 require a minimum of three competitive quotations and issuance of a purchase order. CITY'S OPENING STATEMENT (Page 9) Craig Johnson, Water Services Executive Director, represented the Respondent, City of Glendale and waived his opening statement. APPELLANT'S OPENING STATEMENT (Page 9 - 11) Earl Babcock, Appellant,represented in Propria Persona, gave his opening statement. CITY PRESENTATION (Pages 11 —20,27—30,33—42, 49,54 —71) Craig Johnson, Water Services Executive Director, representing the Respondent, presented the City's case. The following witnesses were called to testify for the City and sworn in: Lawrence Brotman,Utility Ops Superintendent, Water Services Dept. (Pages 13—54) Dawn Saxman, Water Services Administrator, Water Services Dept. (Pages 55—83) APPELLANT'S PRESENTATION(Pages 20 -21,31 —33,42—49, 71 —77,89—90) Earl Babcock, Appellant, represented in Propria Persona,presented his case. The following witnesses were called to testify for the Appellant and sworn in: Joyce Borchert, Sr. Secretary, Water Services Dept. (Pages 90-93) CITY CLOSING ARGUMENTS (Pages 94 - 96) APPELLANT CLOSING ARGUMENTS (Pages 97- 128) CITY FINAL ARGUMENTS (Pages 128- 134) EXHIBITS Exhibits provided by the City and all of the exhibits provided by the Appellant, were admitted into evidence without discussion. PERSONNEL BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS The Personnel Board deliberated the testimony and voted in Open Session. Question No. 1 (Pages 134 - 135) Richard Westby, Chairperson, called to entertain discussion and called for a vote on item number one (1): Was the action of the Appointing Officer based on political, religious or racial prejudice? } -8- i • Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 9 No discussion was held by the Board regarding this question. All members present voted no--The action of the Appointing Officer was not based on political, religious or racial prejudice. Question No.2 (Page 135) Richard Westby, Chairperson, called to entertain discussion and called for a vote on item number two (2): Did the City follow its policies and procedures that provide employees with the right to appeal certain disciplinary actions? No discussion was held by the Board regarding this question. All members present voted yes--The City did follow its policies and procedures that provide employees with the right to appeal certain disciplinary actions. Question No. 3 (Pages 135 - 136) Richard Westby, Chairperson, called to entertain discussion and called for a vote on item number three (3): Did the Appointing Officer have just cause to take disciplinary action based on the stated violations of the Human Resources Policy? No discussion was held by the Board regarding this question. All members present voted yes--The Appointing Officer did have just cause to take disciplinary action based on the stated violations of the Human Resources Policy. Question No. 4 (Pages 136 - 141) Richard Westby, Chairperson, called to entertain discussion and called for a vote on item number four (4): Does the Board sustain or not sustain the action of the Appointing Officer,based on the facts and information presented to the Board? Mr. Haley voted to sustain the disciplinary action, without discussion. The remaining three Board members held discussion regarding this question. Board Member Zomok stated the process seems to fall apart in the enforcement of action in regard to employees using parking lots for personal vehicles. He also stated in regard to the ProCard matter, he could see no discipline or comments for using it the prior year. He stated he did have concerns with two things: Mr. Babcock's "bullshit" comment. He stated based on Mr. Babcock's witness' testimony,he made the comment loud enough for someone outside of his direct communication to hear it. He stated whether or not it offended the witness was not the issue. He believed it could have offended anyone in the area. Mr. Zomok felt the conversation or comment was inappropriate and could have potentially created a liability for the City. Mr. Zomok stated that he was also concerned that several times throughout, Mr. Babcock made statements such as, "Yes, I did lose my temper," and "Yes, I did raise my voice."Mr. Zomok stated, in a leadership role,this is not an acceptable practice. Board Member Gilman stated the parking was not an issue with him since the policy doesn't specifically address what Mr. Babcock did. He stated neither did he have an issue -9- Earl Babcock Personnel Board Hearing Minutes September 9,2013 Page 10 with the procurement statements. He stated, however, like his colleague, Mr. Zomok, he had issues with the perception of several people that Mr. Babcock's behavior has been unprofessional. He also commented on the inappropriate "bullshit" comment by Mr. Babcock. Mr. Gilman stated there seemed to be one common denominator in all the witness testimony and that was Mr. Babcock's behavior. Mr. Gillman stated he was unprofessional, especially with his own supervisor. Chairman Westby stated that he believed Mr. Babcock was probably his own worst enemy because he admitted more or less tacit approval that he did the vast majority of the issued identified in the disciplinary document. In regard to the parking issue, Mr. Westby stated had something happened to Mr. Babcock's vehicle, it would have created a liability issue for the City. All members present voted 4 to 0 to sustain the disciplinary action regarding the suspension of employment of Mr. Babcock. CONCLUSION BY THE CHAIR(Page 140- 141) Richard Westby, Chairperson, concluded the Board found the specific evidence presented at this hearing justified the discipline administered in this matter in regard to Mr. Babcock's suspension and therefore voted to recommend the disciplinary action be sustained. The hearing adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Su. itted by: m Brown uman Resources &Risk Management Executive Director -10 -