– PLACE ON YOUR DEPARTMENTAL LETTERHEAD –
October 20, 2010
Employee Name
Title
Department
Hand-delivered
Dear Mr. Employee:
Please take notice that it is the intent of this office to dismiss you from your position of Social Worker effective November 3, 2010. The grounds upon which this disciplinary action is being proposed are in accordance with Section 4 of Civil Service Commission Rule XIII as follows:
(F) Unacceptable Performance. Unacceptable performance shall mean want of ability suitable to the work, either as regards natural qualities or experience or deficiency of disposition to use one’s ability and experience properly, or failure to continue to perform at an acceptable level.
On October 18, 2010, you received a performance evaluation with a summary rating of “Unsatisfactory”. This performance evaluation documents your failure to perform at an acceptable level and is the latest in a series of performance evaluations documenting your below standard performance. A summary of this documentation is outlined below:
June 2009-April 2010 – Your supervisor, Name, counseled you verbally and in writing about your unacceptable performance. Specific areas of concern were failure to prepare court reports in a timely manner, court reports that were inaccurate and grammatically incorrect, failure to maintain an organized work area, failure to plan and organize your work, failure to observe work hours and discourteous conduct toward clients, coworkers and your supervisor.
April 21, 2010 – Your supervisor issued a memo formally advising you that your performance was unsatisfactory. In this memo, your supervisor stated that, if you were to be evaluated today, the evaluation would have a summary rating of “Unsatisfactory.” Your supervisor stated that you would be afforded 60 days to bring your performance to an acceptable level and would be evaluated at the end of that 60-day period. Your supervisor laid out specific areas in which you needed to improve in order to receive a satisfactory rating (e.g., timeframes for submission of court reports). In an effort to assist you in improving, your supervisor set regular weekly meetings with you (rather than the bi-weekly meeting with other staff) and reduced your caseload.
June 30, 2010 – Your performance did not improve to an acceptable level and, on June 30, 2010, you were issued a performance evaluation with a summary rating of “Improvement Needed.” Among the problems cited in this evaluation were court reports not completed in a timely manner; court reports with many grammatical, spelling and factual errors; disorganization of your work area; failure to plan and organize work; failure to observe work hours; and discourtesy, particularly toward your supervisor. As a result of this below standard performance evaluation, you were placed on a 30-day evaluation cycle with specific goals and objectives to accomplish over the next 30 days.
August 7, 2010 – Your supervisor issued an evaluation of your performance covering the period of July 1-August 4, 2010. This evaluation had a summary rating of Unsatisfactory. In this evaluation, your supervisor documented your failure to meet the goals and objectives set for you. Specifically, it was documented that you still failed to meet expectations in the areas of preparing timely court reports, preparing accurate and grammatically correct court reports, failure to plan and organize work, failure to observe work hours, and discourtesy toward your supervisor. Your supervisor also cited the fact that your caseload was very low during the rating period as you were carrying fourteen to seventeen cases while the standard is twenty-six cases. Your supervisor also advised you in writing that failure to improve your performance to an acceptable level would result in disciplinary action up to, and including, dismissal from County employment. The evaluation set specific goals and objectives for the next 30-day rating period.
September 12, 2010 – Your supervisor issued another evaluation of your performance covering the period of August 7-September 8, 2010. This evaluation had a summary rating of Unsatisfactory. In this evaluation, your supervisor documented your failure to meet the goals and objectives set for you. Specifically, it was documented that you still failed to meet expectations in the areas of preparing timely court reports, preparing accurate and grammatically correct court reports, failure to plan and organize work, failure to observe work hours, and discourtesy toward your supervisor. Your supervisor also cited the fact that your caseload was very low during the rating period as you were carrying sixteen cases while the standard is twenty-six cases. Your supervisor also advised you in writing that failure to improve your performance to an acceptable level would result in disciplinary action up to, and including, dismissal from County employment. The evaluation set specific goals and objectives for the next 30-day rating period.
October 18, 2010 – Your supervisor issued an evaluation of your performance covering the period of September 11-October 13, 2010. This evaluation was marked with a summary rating of Unsatisfactory. In this evaluation, your supervisor cited the fact that your caseload was still very low during the rating period as you were carrying sixteen while the standard is twenty-six cases. Your supervisor documented that you had not met performance expectations in the areas of preparing court reports, desk organization, filing in the case records, time management, and submitting forms with all the required information completed. Your supervisor noted that, during this rating period, two complaints were received from the Court Commissioner about you. These complaints were about a detention memo omitting necessary information which was not up to professional standards demonstrated by other social workers, and about your failure to obtain court authorization prior to sending a child on a visit out of county.
The October 18, 2010 performance evaluation was the fourth consecutive below standard evaluation you have received. These evaluations document severe deficiencies in your performance over a 16-month period. In spite of your supervisor’s continuing efforts to work with you, you have failed to perform at a satisfactory level. During the most recent rating period, we received two complaints from the Court Commissioner about you. Your failure to perform at an acceptable level constitutes Unacceptable Performance, in violation of Civil Service Rule XIII 4(F).
All written materials, reports and documents upon which this action is based are available to you by contacting me. You will further take notice that you have the right to respond either orally or in writing, or both, to the charges contained in this letter. If you wish to respond in writing, your response must be received by Ms. X no later than November 1, 2010. If you wish to respond orally, you must contact Ms. X no later than October 30 to schedule a meeting to be held no later than November 1. If you do not contact Ms. X or provide a written response by the above dates, it will be assumed that you have waived this right. You have the right to be represented by your union in this matter.
Sincerely,
Name
Division Director
cc: Department Head
Skelly Officer
Supervisor
Donna Vaillancourt, Human Resources Director
Nicole McKay, Employee & Labor Relations Manager
Civil Service Personnel File
Department Personnel File