Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/16/1992SPECIAL CALL MEETING Wednesday, December 16, 1992 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, December 16, 1992, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman; Richard N. Bird, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Kenneth R. Macht; and John W. Tippin. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Deputy Clerks Barbara Bonnah and Diane Albin. The Chairman called the meeting to order. APPEAL - THADDEAUS C. FORBES The Board reviewed the following memo dated December 10, 1992: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: December 10, 1992 FILE: SUBJECT: Appeal - Thaddeaus C. Forbes FRO am E. Chandler REFERENCES: nty Administrator The Board is scheduled to hear Thaddeaus C. Forbes termination appeal on Wednesday, December 16, 1992 at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Forbes was notified on November 6, 1992 that his employment as a Motor Equipment Operator I at Sandridge Golf Course was terminated, effective November 13, 1992 ( Exhibit 1) . He appealed his termination to me by a letter dated November 9, 1992 ( Exhibit II). An appeal meeting was conducted by me on November 13, 1992. In attendance at the meeting were: Director Robert Komarinetz, Superintendent Scott Campbell, Assistant Superintendent Vincent Parentela, Personnel Director Jack Price, and Mr. Forbes. As a result of that meeting and Mr. Forbes past performance, I denied his appeal (Exhibit III, IV). By letter dated November 23, 1992, Mr. Forbes requested a hearing for the Board to consider his appeal of my decision ( Exhibit V) . L_DEC g 1992 �o�K �� rrF' 177 DEC 19 1992 BOOK �$t5 PAGE Jl 7.�5 I Attorney Vitunac announced that the personnel rules of Indian River County permit employees whose employment has been terminated to appeal their case before the BCC. The employee and staff have the right to call witnesses and cross-examine. However, the burden of proof is on the employee. Administrator Chandler reported that Thaddeaus C. Forbes was notified in writing on November 6, 1992 that his employment at Sandridge Golf Club was being terminated effective November 13, 1992. Mr. Forbes appealed the termination, and an appeal meeting was held on November 13. An information packet listing the reasons Mr. Forbes was discharged was distributed to the Board. Based on the information in the handout, it was Administrator Chandler's decision at the November 13th meeting to deny Mr. Forbes' request for reinstatement. By letter dated November 23, 1992, Mr. Forbes appealed Administrator Chandler's decision, and that is the purpose of today's meeting. Administrator Chandler stated that the primary reason Mr. Forbes was discharged was his refusal to do his assigned work when he came to work on November 2, 1992. In addition, the employee received numerous warnings since 1982 and as of October 17, 1992 was suspended a total of 16 days for various reasons. Thaddeaus C. Forbes came before the Board and stated under oath that he never refused to do his work but merely asked the assistant superintendent at the golf course, Vincent Parentela, why he was switched from one job to another. Mr. Forbes pointed out that his annual job performance evaluations were not included in the information distributed to the Board. He asked the Board to consider his performance appraisals over the past ten years and noted that all of the reviews rated his job performance as outstanding. Further, none of them stated that he refused to do the work assigned to him. He added that he was written up only 11 times during the first seven years he worked for the County, and then all of sudden from 1990 to 1992 there were another 11 write- ups. He explained that the point he is trying to get across was that there was a conflict between him and his current supervisor. Chairman Eggert asked Mr. Forbes to describe to the Board the last incident that caused him to be sent home. Mr. Forbes replied that he asked his supervisor why he was taken off the fairway, but his supervisor would not give him a reason. Commissioner Bird pointed out to Mr. Forbes that he was not discharged just because of this incident, but because of a number of occurrences over the past several years. He asked Mr. Forbes to 2 explain the other incidents, particularly the five-day suspensions on January 23 and May 29, 1992. Chairman Eggert asked where he was October 17, 1992 when he could not be found for 2-1/2 hours. Mr. Forbes replied that he was on the golf course and did not know why they couldn't find him. The incident on January 23, 1992 occurred because he was behind on his work due to equipment failure, and his supervisor asked why he was doing his work out of order and then told him to clock out and go home without giving him an opportunity to explain. Chairman Eggert asked about his continuous tardiness, and Mr. Forbes replied that he was a slow beginner in the morning and this is something he has tried to work around. Commissioner Bird commented that he was sure Mr. Forbes understood how critical it is for everybody to get to work on time, especially on a golf course. Mr. Forbes responded that he worked that out with every supervisor except Scott Campbell. Director Komarinetz commented that the golf course can't wait when the work needs to be done. Chairman Eggert added that a person has to make some kind of adjustment to a slow starting problem, such as setting several alarm clocks, and then asked Mr. Campbell about the write-up on October 17, 1992 when Mr. Forbes and his equipment could not be located for 2-1/2 hours. Mr. Campbell explained that he received a call that morning on the radio from a mechanic stating that he had a serviceman with him to adjust a fairway mower, which was in use by Mr. Forbes at that time. The mechanic had been around the course twice but could not find Thaddeaus Forbes or the mower, so he asked Mr. Campbell if he would try to find him. Mr. Campbell searched the golf course several times and could not find Mr. Forbes or the mower. He called Vincent Parentela, assistant superintendent, at 11:30 A.M. and asked if he had seen Mr. Forbes, but Mr. Parentela had not seen him. At that point, both Mr. Campbell and Mr. Parentela started looking on and off the golf course. When Mr. Forbes did not come into the shop for lunch, they decided to look for him one more time. They finally found him near the 13th fairway and asked him where he had been. Mr. Forbes contended that he was there and that they had just missed him. Mr. Campbell asked him several times where he was for 2-1/2 hours and Mr. Forbes continued to insist that he was on the course mowing. He finally admitted that he was off the property mowing some people's lawns. Mr. Campbell 3 DEC U` 190 BOOK 88 P" I X r DEC 16 1992 BOOK 88. -7 considered that to be an unsatisfactory response and called Personnel to ask what he should do. Commissioner Adams wondered how long it normally takes to mow up to the 13th fairway, and Mr. Campbell explained that the order of mowing is the 18th, then the 16th, then the 15th, then the 13th. Mr. Forbes should have been a lot farther along than three fairways by 1:30 in the afternoon. Administrator Chandler acknowledged that the performance evaluations showed that Thaddeaus Forbes did exemplary work, but this was not about the quality of his work. Administrator Chandler noted that the 1991 evaluation mentioned an occasional attitude problem and a short temper. He felt that the comment about the attitude problem was significant, particularly in light of what transpired in 1992. Commissioner Bird conveyed that it wasn't a question of Mr. Forbes' ability and skills, it was his attitude and insubordination that could not be tolerated and resulted in his termination. Commissioner Macht stressed that he was speaking from experience that supervisor's write-ups and annual performance appraisals that go in two different directions can cause a lot of problems when an employee appeals a dismissal. Proper evaluations would have mentioned these periodic incidents. Attorney Vitunac advised that this was discussed by staff in theory, and Administrator Chandler pointed out in this record that since January of 1992 the appellant has been out 16-1/2 days without pay because of disciplinary actions. Most of these disciplinary actions were after the glowing performance appraisals. Commissioner Adams asked Mr. Forbes if his main problem was a personality conflict with Mr. Campbell, and Mr. Forbes replied that he was not saying there was a personality conflict, but the supervisor had not brought to his attention that he had an attitude problem. Commissioner Adams commented that according to the write-ups it was brought to Mr. Forbes' attention a number of times. If this was a private business, he would have been long gone. An employee should follow the schedule set by the employer and not work at his convenience. she added that she thought they kept him a lot longer than they should have kept him. Commissioner Macht agreed and added that throughout the years Mr. Forbes was given many opportunities to improve his attitude and behavior. Golf Course Director Bob Komarinetz related that he personally talked to Mr. Forbes a number of times about his attitude problem 4 and also informed him that the supervisors did not have time to argue with an employee about what jobs have to be done. Commissioner Tippin observed as a businessman that only one- third of the incidents mentioned on the handout would be sufficient to result in his dismissal of an employee. Attitude is particularly critical and this kind of attitude would not be tolerated in the private sector. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously upheld the decision of staff to terminate the employment of Thaddeaus C. Forbes. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: ZL� jam'1 G J. arton, Clerk Carolyn/k- Eggervothairman 5 DEC 16 1992 BOOK �;F.37 E