Apr 27 2008
Cook County Corruption Chronicles. . . . Part 49
Excerpts from the second semi-annual report by Shakman Compliance Administrator (CA) Julia M. Nowicki:
D. Human Resources Bureau Chief
A key development since the CA’s last report to the Court has been the resignation of the HR Bureau Chief, the naming of an interim HR Bureau Chief and the search for a permanent HR Bureau Chief.
In December of 2008 or sometime thereafter the County will, under the SRO move to terminate the 1994 Consent Decree on the ground that it is in substantial compliance with the consent decree and the law prohibiting political discrimination.
The indicia of substantial compliance set forth in the SRO include the requirement that,
“the County implement procedures that will effect long-term prevention of the use of impermissible political consideration in connection with employment with the County”
and that:
“the County has implemented the New Plan, including procedures to ensure compliance with the New Plan and identify instances of noncompliance.”
Except for the President, it is the CA’s opinion that no individual in the County will be more instrumental to ensuring the County’s substantial compliance than the HR Bureau Chief. For this reason, the CA has requested the opportunity to monitor the selection of the new HR Bureau Chief.
The CA acknowledges that her request is extraordinary in that this position is a Shakman-exempt position and therefore one in which it is lawful for the President/to take into account political considerations in selecting the individual who is to fill the position. The CA further acknowledges that and commends the President has opened the selection process by posting the position on Monster. com and on the online job board of the Society of Human Resources Professionals (SHRP). The CA has been advised thaithe President plans to appoint a committee to review the resumes received, to interview the candidates and to recommend a candidate to the President. The CA has been advised that the committee will be comprised ofindividuals from the community as well as at least one person from the President’s staff.
While the CA has been invited to address the committee once it is formed, her request to review the materials submitted by all applicants has been refused as has been her request to observe the committees interviews of the applicants. Because of the HR Bureau Chiefs role in the County’s achieving substantial compliance with the SRO and because of the CA’s ultimate responsibility to evaluate the County’s compliance she requests the opportunity to observe and monitor the selection process of the new HR Bureau Chief.
The CA emphasizes that she is making this request for this position only for and for this appointment only. The CA notes that several Commissioners have introduced a resolution recommending that the President accede to the CA’s request.
v. MONITORING
Monitoring the County’s employment practices continues to be the Compliance Administrator’s chief day-to-day activity. The CA continues to monitor the HR activities that occur in the Bureau of HR office located on the eighth floor of the County building. These include all of the activities enumerated in the CA’s “First Semi-Annual Restart” from the posting of open positions to the preparation of the eligibility list, which is sent to the pertinent department.
In addition, the CA monitors all interviews for new hires or promotions and also monitors the impression conference at which the interviewers discuss the candidates and make their recommendations known to the department head.
As of the writing of the “First Semi-Annual Report” the CA had monitored 41 positions. Since then, the CA has monitored 174 positions. The CA has monitored a total of 215 positions (Appendix C). The majority of these postings has not yet resulted in a hire and are still pending at various stages of the hiring process.
To be continued…
You can read the full Shakman report here.
No responses yet
Powered by FireStats