Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/22/1980 No Fault Grievance Orientation Workshop Condensed Report - No Fault Grievance Orientation Workshop St Paul - January 22 , 1980 -- Mn State Dept of HR Agenda 1 . Introduction of DHR staff and welcome remarks from Commissioner Marilyn McClure. 2 . The "why" of local commission involvement. 3 . Why "No Fault" 4 . Review of manual 5 . Pitfalls and other dragons . 6. Summation 7 . Q&A 8 . Adjournment (convened at 7P - adjourned 9 : 30) Attending from Maplewood HR Commission: Marlow and Larsen Facilitator: John Greco - Intake Unit Leader and Liaison local commissions/HR Department Purpose of "No Fault" : Evolve working and productive relation- ship with each other (Dept/locals) ; does not go beyond local commission limitations; is concilliation process not fault finding process. Cautions • Time . . do not retain at local level more than four months. Over six months the state loses jurisdiction. We must keep careful calendar on each case. . Review our own authority. Do not go beyond the scope of the authority set out by our ordinance and spelled out by our governing body (s) . If we feel we might overstep, talk with our city attorney and/or Greco at State level. This is local commission responsibility . Maintaining a neutral stand -- impartiality. No one should get or be left with the impression that we are on "their" side, no matter what we feel the circumstances might be. If you feel there might be a problem with neutrality, turn the case down. We would lose face with both grievant and respondent, and credibility with our City councils and community. We would not be "advocates" , we would be facili- tators. 2-No Fault Grievance Procedure Orientation - January 22, 1980 4 . Right to privacy. Either party has this right. Even organizations should be thought of as "people" ; legally they are. Anyone maintaining or with access to the files must also be held to the bonds of confidentiality. If we chose to meet in open session to deal with one or more cases, we could code the cases so they could be discussed generally without revealing who is involved. Better yet, has a committee, within the committee empowered and trained to do the work. Reports would then be factual as to number, activity and outcome. . Why local commission involvement We are neighbors and peers of the organizations and residents which would be involved; does away with "State sticking it ' s nose in" . Would take very little form or formality to resolve a local dispute at the local level. Lots of clout when you are talking with a neighbor peer rather than a faceless state agency. The closer to the source of the problem the easier the solution. Local companies or citizens would take great pains to keep up proper image. L-- . Why No Fault We would not be attempting to find out who is at fault; we would attempt to resolve a problem .without assigning blame. These cases are 45% breakdown in communication, or miscommuni- cation. We do not go out and "investigate" the charge, we become a bridge between the claimant and the respondent . The less we know about the cause of the situation the more we will zero in on the effect. Do not get involved in the day to day details, except where needed to expedite process . This is a volunteer effort at the local level; can work from strength or weakness of each commission. Do what we want to do when and if we wish to do it. Once we have committed, do the best job we can. We would not tell respondent what to do; give them alternatives and let him/her make the choice. In depth training in March. 3-No Fault Grievance Procedure Orientation - January 22 , 1980 • Why No Fault cont. Saves time and money; both can get considerable when a formal charge is filed (this is also a good argument to use with a respondent if reluctant to meet with commission -- must be used with care) . Claimants that appear at the state level will be told of a commission (their particular community or the community in which the grievance took place) who has signed the Procedure. We will also be informed of cases where the State retains jurisdiction as a choice of the grievant. We will receive computer runs of all cases after May of this year. Now being set up. Pitfalls Certain legal rights that cannot be abrogated; a charge at the State level can be filed by grievant at any time during our involvement. Liability if we delay a charge beyond time limit; our actions are our governing bodies actions . Hostility; from either side. Wash your hands of the matter and turn it over to the State. Review of Manual : Self explanatory and written very down to earth. • General If we accept new Procedure, a letter to Commissioner McClure would be in order. Appoint attendees to formal training sessions. State available for any problems that come up that we have not been trained for. State will be responsible for good communication with commission to see how a particular case is coming. Can see from the way the case if progressing if commission is going in the wrong direction. Can then take hold. NO SERVICE IS BETTER THAN POOR SERVICE .