Reilly: County has problem firing workers

Adrienne Packer

Thursday, Jan. 31, 2002 | 9:09 a.m.

Government researchers dinged Clark County in a recent survey for keeping weak employees, but the criticism is hardly a revelation for top officials.

Clark County Manager Thom Reilly said Wednesday that poor management training and failure to document bad behavior have made it difficult for the county to fire employees, even when it's the obvious solution.

"Many times progressive disciplinary procedures are not followed and when it gets to the point they want to terminate an employee, it would be tough to argue before the court," Reilly said.

In a survey that examined 40 counties nationwide, Clark County was one of eight counties noted for its struggle to get rid of ineffective workers. The Government Performance Project study was conducted by Syracuse University.

Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury, who has served on the board for more than two decades, blamed the county's reluctance to let employees go on strict collective bargaining agreements and a fear of litigation.

"My impression is that it is difficult to terminate problem employees," Woodbury said. "We have been sued and we've had to pay a lot of money; normally in settlements, sometimes verdicts."

The question is why the 32 other counties scrutinized by the research group didn't share the same problems.

Richard Greene, a project editor and manager of Governing magazine, said governments that scored better have clearer policies and strictly follow disciplinary procedures.

"You need documentation to show there has been a steady problem; there has to be progressive steps to termination," Greene said.

"There is still some risk of someone suing, but they're not going to win. At the end of the day, keeping people on because they're afraid they're going to get sued is not a good way to run government."

When Reilly took office in August, his edict was clear: Simply because county employees and supervisors were comfortable under a regime that spanned nearly 15 years didn't mean their jobs were safe.

Four long-term managers immediately took advantage of the county's voluntary separation program.

One of the outgoing supervisors, former facilities manager Bill Barrett, had a series of policy violations in his personnel file.

Barrett was suspended in 1996 for ordering $120,000 in renovations to a Metro Police substation without authorization, according to county records.

He was admonished several times for campaigning for Commissioner Mary Kincaid-Chauncey while on county time, which according to a county memo written to Barrett, is a clear violation of the county's policy.

Though Barrett's violations were well documented, he left the county voluntarily. His departure came shortly before his relationship with Kincaid-Chauncey was reviewed by the Nevada Ethics Commission.

Greene said workers' personal relationships with managers or elected officials can also play a role in government entities failing to terminate employees. After studying the 40 counties, Greene found three scenarios.

"It falls into three groups," Greene said. "Places it doesn't happen, places it happens and nobody knows it happens and places it happens and people know exactly why it's happening.

"It does happen, but obviously it's a type of thing you would try to avoid."

Woodbury said he hopes the number of employees who keep their jobs because of personal relationships are low. He added that he has never asked an administrator not to take action against a staff member who is not performing.

Both Reilly and Woodbury agreed with the researchers' assessment of the termination process and said they share similar goals to resolve the problem.

"Thom has the intent to try to weed out the bad apples," Woodbury said. "His attitude is like mine; he wants to find a way to make sure everyone is carrying their weight or something should be done about it."01