County reviews administrative coordinator job description
Taylor County took another step toward expanding the authority of the administrative coordinator/human resources director.
On Tuesday, committee members of the special administrative coordinator committee reviewed a proposed job description making some changes before approving it to send on to the personnel committee. The job description will go on for final approval at the June county board session.
Prior to the meeting, committee members had received a deft four-page job description for the post. The intent is to have the administrative coordinator/human resources director serve to provide day-to-day oversight of county employees including department heads. Empowering a staff member to have that role is a shift away from a county-board and committee chairperson run model that has been in use in the past.
The draft job description was developed based on the input from past meetings of the special committee and the review of job descriptions for administrative coordinators in other counties. The duties of the position include those of the current human resources director as well as other general oversight duties for the entire county.
A major change to the draft job description made at the meeting was to add language to clearly state “the position holds supervisory authority for all staff (including department heads) as permitted by law, and is responsible for enforcing Employee Handbook, County Board policies, and County Code, including the management of disciplinary actions up to and including termination.”
Committee member Scott Mildbrand said he thought the language was needed. “I think it is one of the main reasons for the county to go this route,” he said.
Committee members questioned if the specific oversight committee chairman should be involved if there was a department-head level termination or discipline that needs to take place.
Committee member Mike Bub said there are times and situations where the administrative coordinator may have to take immediate action. However, he said in many cases it may be a matter of suspending the employee and sending them home pending additional review and action. He said he didn’t want to tie the hands of the administrative coordinator though if action was needed.
Administrative coordinator/human resource director Nicole Hager noted that her personal style is to have a more collaborative approach and said she would likely seek input if possible from committee chairs and the county board chair before taking action against a department head.
It was noted that under the grievance policy, employees who disagreed with the administrative coordinator’s action had the right to appeal it to the personnel committee.
Committee member Chuck Zenner cautioned about the need for the board not to appear to undermine the administrative coordinator. Other committee members agreed, Bub noted that seldom do county board members have the full information for personnel issues within the county, where the goal of the administrative coordinator is to have more direct day-to-day oversight.
Suckow noted that the major problem in counties they talked with who made the switch to a more formal administrative structure was not with the staff, but with board members.
“The supervisors and county board need to keep their noses out of it,” Suckow said.
There was also discussion to clarify that for filling budgeted open positions, the administrative coordinator would have the authority to move forward with hiring the position. Currently filling a routine vacancy involves a meeting of the oversight committee and personnel committee. The intent is to streamline the process and reduce the need for additional committee meetings in order to fill vacancies.
Changes with a financial impact, such as adding positions, would continue to require the approval of the finance committee.
Another area of discussion was to give the position the additional responsibility to make committee organizational recommendations to the county board. There has been an ongoing push in the county to consolidate or remove some standing committees. The language change in the draft job description would give the administrative coordinator the authority to look at committee structure. It would still be up to the full county board to make any committee structure changes.
There was also discussion regarding which oversight committee the position will report to with committee members agreeing that the position will be in the human resources department and report to the three-person executive committee.
The next step for the job description will be to go to the personnel committee and then to the full board. While that is going on the draft job description will be sent to the county’s wage consultants to be put into the pay matrix.
Hager also reported working on a document that would seek to define the roles of the administrative coordinator, the supervisors and committee chairs as a tool to avoid confusion. The document will be brought to the county board in the future.
Suckow said it was important for supervisors to know their role. Bub agreed and said they also need to ensure that county employees in all departments know the resolutions passed by the board are not optional.
