2/19/1986 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FEB 19 1986 Boa 63 FA.cE708 existing rules, Mr. Cochran would receive up to a 5% increase, depending on his evaluation. Mr. Cochran then informed the Board that his supervisor did his probationary evaluation, rated him very good, and gave him 80" points, but a week later he brought the evaluation back and it was lowered to 74 points and changed from very good to satisfac- tory. Chairman Scurlock felt possibly Mr. Cochran might want to file a grievance. Mr. Cochran did not feel he was in a position to file a grievance as his probation was just up yesterday, but the Chairman assured him that he was in a position to file a grievance and it should have no effect on how he is treated. Mr. Cochran continued to emphasize that he could not understand how he could get such a low evaluation when he has nine years experience. Commissioner Bird believed the evaluation is based on the employee's performance here during the six months, not his previous experience, and the Administrator agreed. He could not answer Mr. Cochran's questions and advised that he go through the grievance process. Bob Halliday of the Utilities Department next came before the Board and advised that his six months probation period just ended about two weeks ago. His evaluation came up and his supervisor marked.him very good in every category, and put a nice comment on the evaluation. This evaluation was then passed on to the head of Utilities, who read it over, whited out everything his supervisor had written, and changed his rating in everything from very good to satisfactory. Mr. Thomas stated that his supervisor was rather disgusted, but said he couldn't do anything about it and told him he could file a grievance if he wanted to. Mr. Thomas continued that he asked if that would effect him getting his increase, and the supervisor said no, that he still would be getting his increase. However, when he asked him again 18