← Older Posts
Newer Posts →

Handling Employee Affairs Via Email
Posted on December 29, 2015 by Andrea Shindlebower in Use of Email in City Government

Use of Email in City Government – Handling Employee Affairs

The use of email by government officials often becomes headline news.  It is important that city officials and employees keep in mind that emails are like any other public record in that each one, outside of an exception found in KRS 61.878, can constitutes a public record subject to the Open Records Act and the Record Retention Schedule.  Misuse of city email not only damages the reputation of the person misusing it, but also greatly damages the reputation of the city and its appointed and elected officials.   

As such, cities should have a policy in place that informs employees of what is and is not acceptable.  Policies at the least should:

 

  • Advise that the Open Records Act as well as the Department of Libraries and Archives Record Retention Schedule is applicable to the city and its agencies;
  • Notify employees that the city monitors email and internet usage, and that employees should have no expectation of privacy, as anything sent out over the communications or computer system could constitute an open record;
  • Instruct employees about the proper use of its communications and computer systems (i.e. city use only or whether occasional personal use is permitted); and
  • Have an acknowledgement form signed by all employees stating that they have read and understand all the city policies.

No better time than the present for cities to:

  • Review, update and redistribute their policies regarding employee use of city e-mail and internet access;
  • Remind employees that city resources should only be used for legitimate, business purposes;
  • Consider blocking access to certain websites on city-provided computers and internet;
  • Reiterate that employees have no expectation of privacy when it comes to their use of city electronic systems.

Also keep in mind that as city email should not be used for personal business, city officials should not use theirpersonal email accounts for city business, since again, they are subject to the Open Records Act as well as the Record Retention Schedule.  For more information on this topic see the previous Use of Email in City Government article. 

For sample personnel policies or more information on this or any other personnel matter, contact Andrea Shindlebower, Personnel Services Specialist, at ashindlebower@klc.org

SHARE THIS:

Use of Email in City Govt.
Posted on December 29, 2015 by Andrea Shindlebower in Use of Email in City Government

Use of Email in City Government

The use of email, especially personal email, by government officials has become the latest in headline news.  Keep in mind that emails are like any other public record in that each one, outside of an exception found in KRS 61.878, can constitutes a public record subject to the Open Records Act and the Record retention Schedule.  Because of this, the city must be certain to evaluate each electronic message to see if it fits into an exception and if not to be certain to follow the most recent record retention requirements set out by the Department of Libraries and Archives.

The Attorney General clearly states that public officials should avoid the use of a personal email account to conduct city business.  In 2014, the Attorney General stated that using private email accounts is a practice that raises “significant records management and retention issues.”  As an alternative to using a private account, the Attorney General states that public agencies can establish “separate email accounts for employees through a free service, such as Gmail, using a common naming convention that identifies” the government (for example, johndoecityofpleasant@gmail.com).  Another alternative is “to set up a single dedicated open records account, using a free service, to which all responsive email maintained on personal accounts could be forwarded, saved, and exported in the event of an open records request.”

In whatever way the city decides to handle email retention, a written policy needs to be in place that delineates the information for all city officials.  At the very minimum, the policy needs to address:  

  • That the Open Records Act as well as the Department of Libraries and Archives Record Retention Schedule is applicable to the city and its agencies;
  • That the policy applies to all electronic messages created, received, retained, used or disposed of related to city business or used in the name of the city; and
  • User responsibility in regards to retention and disposition of electronic messages.  

Deciding which electronic records must be retained is not an easy feat.  Electronic records will have to be gathered and a decision made as to whether or not they are exempt based on one of the open records exemptions.  More information on how that process works as well as a model policy can be found athttp://kdla.ky.gov/records/recmgmtguidance/Pages/elecrecmgmt.aspx

For additional sample policies or more information on this or any other personnel matter, contact Andrea Shindlebower at ashindlebower@klc.org.

 

SHARE THIS:



Romance in the Workplace
Posted on December 29, 2015 by Andrea Shindlebower in Romance in the workplace

Love is in the air!  And unfortunately for cities, sometimes that love can come in the form of those in employee relationships.  So what is an employer to do about these situations? 

Some employers choose to enact policies that completely ban romantic relationships in the workplace, but even this is not without its own set of issues.  By completely banning you can force employees that are in a romantic relationship to go into hiding, which leaves the city completely unaware and unprepared for the issues that may result.  By not dealing with this out in the open it can be the source of even bigger problems down the road.

Other employers choose to allow it to happen as long as there is disclosure.  This can also create problems of its own.  Many employees will perceive that preferential treatment is being received by a coworker based on their relationship, especially when one is in a supervisory role over the other. 

No matter the policy that your city enacts, you need to review your ethics ordinance and personnel policies to see what they say about employees and supervisory relationships.  In addition, does this relationship create a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest and is it the subject of office gossip?  Any relationship, whether it is causal or romantic should not have a negative impact on city business.  And lastly, if love goes south, an employee can claim retaliation and harassment based on the previous relationship, which along with many other problems, may prove to be costly in court.

So how can the city protect itself from love gone wrong? 

  • First, have a clearly written policy with expectations set out in an easy to read and understand format.  And, it is recommended that those in supervisory positions should not be allowed to date subordinates under any circumstances. 
  • Second, if your city ethics ordinance applies to city employees, and your nepotism policy applies to dating relationships, be certain that it is also included in the personnel policy. 
  • Lastly make sure that your sexual harassment policy is up to date, has a clearly established complaint procedure and that all employees and supervisors are trained on what the policy states and what it requires.

Running a city is not all champagne and roses, so you need to protect the city by being proactive.  One of the ways to do this is to have a current and legally compliant personnel policy.  If your city needs to update personnel policies you need to work with someone who not only has expertise in personnel law and human resource matters, but someone who knows municipal law as well.  KLC can offer this expertise in a way that is specific to your city needs.  Whether it is creating or reviewing city personnel policies, providing training on your city policies, sexual harassment, or on a variety of specialized HR topics, we have you covered.  For more information on this service or any other personnel related matters contact Andrea Shindlebower at ashindlebower@klc.org.   

SHARE THIS:

Preservation, Safekeeping and Retention- Part 4

Preservation, Safekeeping and Retention

The last installment of this series addresses something that can be disastrous for a city.  If not handled properly, manager desk files can wreak havoc with the city personnel system as well as be an issue in regards to open records requests and lawsuits. 

The debate over whether manager desk files should be permitted is a long-standing issue. Personnel records, as well as any other city-generated document, should be kept at city hall as the city clerk, by statute, is the custodian of all city records.  If managers do have desk files, they need to be certain that the original document is maintained by the city clerk and that only a copy is contained within their files.  Managers also need to be aware that any confidential records must be securely maintained.  In many cases, this requires that managers be trained on what is confidential and what is considered an open record. 

Personnel policies should also address this issue and provide guidance on how the desk files will be maintained, if they are allowed at all.  Explanations in regards to statutory requirements should be given so that managers fully understand the importance of these procedures. 

Lastly, be aware that manager desk files are also discoverable in the event of a lawsuit. Because of this, managers need to know what is and is not acceptable in regards to their recordkeeping.  A periodic review of what a manager is keeping can assist a city in addressing potential issues before they arise. 

For questions on this or other personnel matters, contact Andrea Shindlebower Main, personnel services specialist.

SHARE THIS:

← Older Posts
Newer Posts →