4/24/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOOK 94 rmu 91 your work area clean. You were further admonished that failure to correct these deficiencies would result in further disciplinary action as provided for in the Indian River County Administrative Policy Manual. FINDING: Exhibits submitted during the hearing established that a written warning was discussed in detail with you by your supervisor for the same type of poor job performance that you had been warned about repeatedly. You submitted no documentation to controvert your supervisor's testimony other than a less than plausible statement that you felt you were doing your job. INCIDENT #5: On November 4, 1994, John Ring, your supervisor, gave you a written warning (Exhibits M & U) and discussed in detail with you your continued poor job performance. On October 24, 1994, you were given a written memorandum reminding you that a month earlier (Exhibit R) you had beenassigned the task of cataloging and reorganizing the technical, education, and legislative documents on certain bookshelves. An additional task was assigned relating to completing the inventory form for the supply room which - you had been working on for a week. Since your supervisor was going to be out of town, he informed you in the memorandum that the deadline for completing these tasks was October 28, 1994. Upon your supervisor's return to the office, he found your work product to be substandard and incomplete, even though you informed him by phone that you had completed the assignments on October 26, 1994. Your written warning described that if you continued to fail to complete routine projects or duties assigned to you, severe disciplinary action, possibly leading to termination, would result. It was communicated to me that you possess the ability; however, you refuse to improve to a level commensurate with the requirements of your position classification. FINDING: It was established at the hearing that you received a written warning, which is a substantial disciplinary action, that should have impressed upon you that your job performance was in need of immediate improvement. Photos were taken of what you considered was a final work product. Your supervisor introduced the photos as exhibits (Exhibit T - 7 photos) which, in my opinion, demonstrated and established that the job was less than complete and unacceptable. Your excuse was that you misunderstood what your assignment was even though.you were provided a memorandum by your supervisor and he testified that he explained in detail to you the expected final work product. I again find that your explanation for this unsatisfactory level of job performance is unacceptable, inasmuch as your supervisor called the office on more than one occasion each* day and you could have sought clarification on any part of the assignment that you did not understand. Further, you knew exactly where to reach him at any time if you had any questions about the assignments you were given. INCIDENT #6: On January 24, 1995, your supervisor John Ring, writes in a memorandum dated January 25, 1995, (Exhibit W) that you contacted Administrative Secretary Diane Albin to report that you were ill and would not be able to come to work. At approximately 3:30PM on this same date, Diane Albin was delivering correspondence and.needed the key from your desk to walk around through the utilities office since a meeting was in progress in the conference room. Etta LoPresti was sitting at your desk working on a project when Diane asked her to hand her the door key from your middle desk drawer. When Etta opened the drawer, she found a stack of approximately 100 EMS run reports which are sensitive, 4 April 24, 1995