Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/15/2002 09:10 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 292
"An Act making supplemental and other appropriations; amending
appropriations; making appropriations to capitalize funds; and
providing for an effective date."
This was the fourth hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Donley stated the Committee would hear from Department of
Corrections and Department of Law staff directly involved in the
Dr. Harold claims case against the State. Co-Chair Donley noted the
Governor's FY 02 Supplemental Budget contains a request to fund a
settlement of Harold vs. State. He announced that the Committee is
developing a policy requiring staff directly involved in cases such
as this be available to answer questions, in addition to the
traditional presentation by the Department of Law.
BARBARA RITCHIE, Deputy Attorney General, Civil Division,
Department of Law, noted she is involved in the case at the
Department of Law level.
DWAYNE PEEPLES, Director, Division of Administrative Services,
Department of Corrections; stated he is the supervisor of the human
resource labor relations operations for the Department of
Corrections, where the termination of Doctor Harold was processed.
Senator Ward requested the Department supply the Committee with a
copy of the newsletter that Dr. Harold distributed to nurses.
DAVID JONES; Assistant Attorney General, Governmental Affairs
Section, Civil Division, Department of Law and the attorney
directly involved in the case, testified via teleconference from
Anchorage, and stated he would provide a copy of the letter to the
Committee.
Co-Chair Donley inquired as to why the State should pay this claim.
Mr. Jones responded this was a very difficult case and voiced that
the Department acted appropriately. He informed the Committee the
Department was restructuring its health care programs for the
institutions and had hired Dr. Harold to implement the new program;
however, Dr. Harold was proving "resistant" to the proposed
changes. Mr. Jones stated that although "it was clear that this was
not an employment relationship that was going to work out," the
Department was operating under significant time and financial
restraints in accomplishing the restructuring.
Mr. Jones stated that one of Dr. Harold's lawsuits cites being a
"whistle blower" as a reason for his dismissal. Mr. Jones stated
this and other claims have not been proven to be factual.
Mr. Jones informed the Committee that "whistle blower" cases are
difficult to defend as they require analysis of managers involved
in the case, and that it "is hard to convince someone who is
convinced that they are being retaliated against" that is not the
case. He stressed there is always the chance that the judge or jury
may side with the employee. He declared these are some of the
reasons the Department recommends settling with Dr. Harold.
Co-Chair Donley asked why progressive discipline actions were not
taken.
Mr. Peeples informed the Committee that specific plans and
instructions were provided to Dr. Harold during several meetings.
Mr. Peeples stated the Department discussed the direction of the
program with Dr. Harold and instructed him not to continue his
resistance to the plan. He was put on notice several times and had
several discussions with the Commissioner regarding the
Department's "displeasure" with his behavior and actions.
Mr. Peeples continued that in dealing with an employee at this
level, " …a doctor in a highly paid, exempt position…" progressive
disciplinary actions involving conducting multiple hearings and
discussions were not deemed necessary.
Co-Chair Donley inquired as to who was Dr. Harold's immediate
supervisor.
Mr. Peeples stated that Dr. Harold's supervisor was Mel Henry,
Health Care Administrator, Office of the Commissioner, Department
of Corrections.
Co-Chair Donley inquired who made the decision to terminate Dr.
Harold.
Mr. Peeples stated that after consultation with himself, and the
Human Resource Labor Relations Operations Division, the
commissioner made the decision.
Co-Chair Donley voiced support for the goal of making the
Department more efficient and cost effective; however, stressed
that progressive disciplinary actions are important, "even for
upper level positions," as it might help avoid these types of
scenarios.
Senator Green asked if Co-Chair Donley considers the progressive
disciplinary process applicable to all fully exempt personnel.
Co-Chair Donley remarked it would be "wise to use progressive
discipline in the process."
Senator Green respectfully disagreed, and stated she does not
support any change in employment law for exempt status employees.
Co-Chair Donley concurred with Senator Green's comments; however
reiterated, at times, a record in the file might save the state
some money.
Senator Green stated that even if a specified process was followed,
when it gets into a court situation, conditions differ.
Co-Chair Donley re-stated to the Department of Law that it is the
intent of the Committee to have personnel directly involved in
issues, testify before the Committee.
The bill was HELD in Committee.
AT EASE: 9:22 AM / 9:23 AM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|