Beginning April 1, about 3,000 additional civil service employees at Urbana will be covered by the Performance Partnership Program, a performance-management system that emphasizes good performance and helps employees commit to improve attendance, conduct or other problems.
About 2,800 employees on the Urbana campus, including employees represented by Service Employees International Union Local 119, AFSCME Local 698, and International Union of Operating Engineers Local 399 are covered by the PPP, which was first used at Urbana in 1999.
As of April 1, AFSCME Local 3700 employees and employees classified as Open Range Civil Service workers also will be covered under the program. The 1,600 clerical employees in AFSCME Local 3700, who ratified a new four-year collective bargaining agreement with the university in January, will participate on an 18-month trial basis.
The principal concepts of the PPP are recognizing and reinforcing good performance, removing obstacles that impede performance, and establishing clear and constructive communication between supervisors and employees about expectations.
“It’s called a partnership because employees and supervisors are partners in an employment relationship,” said Angela Reggans, program coordinator in Staff Human Resources. “Both parties are adults, responsible for making decisions, committing to their decisions and are responsible for their actions. An employee’s word that they’ll correct their performance is much more valuable than a supervisor’s mandating that they comply. The PPP treats people with dignity and respect and allows them to feel good about themselves and the process.”
The current discipline process is a traditional progressive system focused on punishing misdeeds and ensuring compliance with the rules, with no provision for recognizing the majority of workers who are good employees, Reggans said.
The majority of employees are meeting or exceeding expectations; a significant component of the PPP is informal and formal positive recognition. Since beginning the program in 1999, Staff Human Resources has received more than 6,000 letters recognizing employees for outstanding performance, including employees who were not covered by the PPP at the time.
“Supervisors are really interested in recognizing their employees, and we’re really serious about having them recognize their employees when it’s warranted,” Reggans said.
Under the program, supervisors have formal and informal steps for providing feedback to employees about performance expectations and problems, including “constructive contacts,” which are day-to-day, non-disciplinary discussions. “Performance improvement discussions,” which are structured discussions that are documented and outline the problem, the employee’s commitment to improvement and the action to be taken, are another kind of feedback.
The program’s formal disciplinary procedures begin with a work-performance reminder, which involves written documentation and a pre-disciplinary meeting with the employee, the supervisor and the employee’s union representative. At the meeting, the focus is upon gaining the employee’s acknowledgment that a problem exists and an agreement to rectify the situation. The work-performance reminder is equivalent to a low-level suspension under the current discipline program.
The second official disciplinary step under the program is a written reminder, which is equivalent to a mid-level suspension under the current program and will be used when the reminder has been unsuccessful or when an infraction is so serious as to warrant more stringent action. A formal pre-disciplinary meeting is held to discuss the infraction and the need for immediate correction of the problem, and the discussion is documented and communicated to the employee in writing.
The final disciplinary step under the program is a decision-making leave, which comprises a pre-disciplinary meeting followed by a one-day paid suspension that gives the employee an opportunity to reflect upon the seriousness of the situation and commit to changing the behavior. If the employee chooses not to make an oral commitment to improvement, he or she could choose to remain employed without one – and face possible discharge if problems continue – or choose to voluntarily resign.
The one-day decision-making leave, comparable to a 30-day suspension under the current program, will be used in situations where lesser disciplinary measures have been unsuccessful and when infractions are of such severity they warrant a final-step action, regardless of whether any official actions have been taken previously.
If formal and informal actions fail to correct ongoing performance deficits within the 24-month active period following an infraction or when an offense is so serious that continued employment cannot be justified, an employee can be discharged for cause.
Under the program, employees have the same avenues for appealing disciplinary action, including the right to grievances as outlined in their union contracts and to appeal discharge to the State Universities Civil Service System Merit Board or to arbitration.
Disciplinary suspensions without pay are not part of the PPP, and each level of corrective discipline is active for a finite period, ranging from six to 24 months, provided no other formal corrective action is taken during that time. Once a disciplinary document is deactivated, it cannot be used to advance disciplinary action against the employee, and the disciplinary process would have to be re-initiated to address a subsequent infraction. Deactivated disciplinary documents will remain in the employee’s official personnel file for archival purposes, however.
Back to Index