PSD survey: Budget battles hurt morale
No evidence of racial discrimination
The Journal
Thursday, May 8, 2008
James Island Public Service District employees are asking a bickering commission and district management to reconcile. Consultant Joan K. Ustin told PSD commissioners that an employee survey revealed workers' low morale was triggered by a three-month budget battle between the commission and district management. "The largest impact on morale is what goes on at commission meetings," Ustin told commissioners at its April 30 Administrative Committee meeting. "Concerns had to do with the climate on the commission and how it impacted work." The commissioners later said they were ready to move on Ustin's recommendation that they develop better relationships with one another. Ustin spent six weeks interviewing all 113 district employees about their work environment, using open-ended questions and soliciting comments. The commission hired her in January to conduct workplace interviews after two anonymous letters surfaced last summer alleging racial discrimination by Wastewater Superintendent Kristen Champagne. "From open-ended questions, (there was) no evidence of or even a suggestion of racial discrimination," Ustin said. "I did find a number of employees have perceptions about favoritism. Racially or nonracially, (many) don't understand what is required to be promoted." Stephen DeAntonio, Champagne's attorney, later said of the survey results, "We're pleased but we're not surprised. The allegations against Kristen Cham-pagne were false and should never have been brought forth publicly by the commission." Commenting on the survey, Ustin suggested to commissioners that the district move away from employee reviews that rate work performance using a numerical system and toward a review process that uses words. "What you have now is haggling over decimal points," Ustin said. "In today's more progressive organizations, there is more open communication." Employees also expressed a desire for better salaries, training, equipment and overall safety, she said. Without naming anyone, she quoted from employees' interviews. "Too many voice concern on not feeling safe. 'I don't feel safe or I can't do my job well,' " Ustin said. " 'Safety procedures were not uniformly followed.' " The survey spotlighted other employee concerns, including salaries. "One out of four employees are saying, 'If I was offered another job, I would not stay. I can make more money elsewhere,' " Ustin said. "During the interviews, several people said they had put in their resignations or were about to. It's a tremendous concern. Turnover is very expensive." Ustin was quick to point out that the survey was conducted during a contentious budget season. "When you do an employee survey, it's like taking an organization's temperature," Ustin said. A unanimously approved budget and next year's employee raises may boost morale, she said. Commissioner Donald Hollingsworth said the overall results were "an eye-opener," and agreed there was a lot to work on. "I don't like some things (I heard), but that's the way it is," Commissioner Inez Brown-Crouch said. "We have a lot of work ahead of us. Let's pick up the pieces and do what's recommended. We can make great changes to the district." Commissioner Charles Rhodes agreed. "It's in our laps." The survey results weren't all bad, Ustin said. The majority of the employees reported they liked their co-workers and liked the services they provided to residents, Ustin said. The PSD handles sewer, garbage pickup, fire and rescue for about 22,000 residents. Ustin suggested that department heads and employees meet more often to discuss the work environment and have midyear reviews, as well as evaluate the current equipment and make necessary repairs. She said department heads should review the survey results and implement improvements within their departments.
|
Posted by Henry_Horres_Jr on May 8, 2008 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As I read this, it appears the PSD Commissioners called for a study of the PSD's problems and the findings indicate that the commissioners are the problem?
I could never expect any editorial content in the Journal critical of the PSD or the Town of James Island, but it would be nice if a little more coverage was given to the upcoming elections for both.
The election commissions will of course make the perfunctory announcement in the back of the paper, but given all the controversy swirling around the way the Town and the PSD are being managed, this should be front page stuff. And it should be timely to the point of making any potential candidates a chance to mount an effective campaign.
I often suspect the incumbents frown on wide dissemination concerning election filing periods and requirements, and election particulars. This would of course work in their favor. And I am also sure the composition of the election commission is heavily influenced by the incumbents where at all possible. Same reason.
This is not to suggest the people involved are not to be trusted. It's just that I don't trust them.
As I have mentioned before, we do no have any democratic forms of government on James Island. What we have are oligarchies. That means government of the few, by the few and for the few. The inherent dangers of oligarchies is well documented. But that is what we have in the Town and the PSD, and will have unless more people get involved.
There is clear evidence that The Town of James Island would like to take over the PSD. This would of course eliminate a certain amount of duplication of effort, and result in a stronger Town. But if this should ever happen, some protection needs to be given to ensure retention of most PSD employees. The have served the Island magnificently over the years, and should not be cast aside to facilitate political patronage.