Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHuman Relations Commission - Minutes - 07/12/2001Human Relations Commission CIC Room 300 W. Laporte Avenue July 12, 2001, 5:30-7-30', p.m. Council Liaison: Marty Tharp Staff Liaison; Angelina Powell 'Phone 221 029 Chairperson: Bob Lenk Phone: 493-5809 A regular meeting of the Human Relations Commission was held on July 12, 2001 in the CIC Room, 300 W. Laporte Avenue. HRC Members present Dan Devine, Mary Gomez, Ingrid Kolstoe, Bob Lenk, Man Oberoi, Rita Klepac, Shion Hung HRC Members absent Parker Preble, Richard Miller with notification Staff Members present: Angelina Powell, HRC Staff Liaison I. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Bob Lenk at 5:30 p.m. II. Dan Suciu Appeal. Appellant present: Dan Suciu. Respondents present: Stephen J. Jonard, Legal Representative of Advanced Energy Mike Domeraski, Supervisor of Cables/Subs Georgia Jenkins, AE Human Resources Jean Paulson, AE Human Resources Staff members present: Greg Tempel, Assistant City Attorney Barbara Spalding, Human Rights Officer Mr. Dan Suciu filed an appeal with the Human Relations Commission after receiving the Human Right Officer's Notice of Dismissal of his complaint of discrimination based on age and national origin. Assistant City Attorney Greg Tempel began the hearing with a review of the procedures for the hearing. At this point, Vice Chairperson Ingrid Kolstoe excused herself from the discussion because of the potential for a conflict of interest. (Ms. Kolstoe had worked for Addecco Temporary Employment Agency and Advanced Energy is a client of Addecco) Ms. Kolstoe left the discussion table. Mr. Suciu began with a 10 minute oral argument. Mr. Suciu, on appeal, must establish by a preponderance of the evidence one of the following: there is new evidence available which supports the complaint and which was not available at the time of the investigation of the Human Rights Officer (HRO); the findings of fact or conclusions of the HRO were clearly erroneous based on the evidence presented at the time of the investigation; or the HRO abused his or her discretion or acted beyond the scope of his or her authority. Human Relations Common Page 2 E Mr. Stephen Jonard and Mr. Mike Domeraski responded with a 10 minute oral argument. They offered evidence that the reason Mr. Suciu's employment was terminated was based on his documented inability to meet appropriate and measurable performance standards for his position as an assembler. As a result of his documented, poor performance, he was placed on a "performance improvement plan" and given time for improvement. Mr. Suciu was unable to correct his performance problems in the period allowed and was terminated on February 20, 2001. Commission members posed questions to both the complainant, Mr. Domeraski and Mr. Jonard on a variety of issues including: • Mr. Suciu's performance history throughout his years of employment • How performance standards are established • Whether Mr. Suciu's performance data was available prior to Mr. Domeraski's becoming his supervisor • Why Mr. Suciu believed the issue was one of discrimination Both the complainant and respondents provided closing arguments. Motion. Man Oberoi made a motion to affirm the decision of the Human Rights Officer. Dan Devine seconded. The Commission voted unanimously to dismiss the complaint in this case. III. Approval of Minutes. Chair Bob Lenk asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held on May 10, 2001. Man Oberoi made a motion to approve. Mary Gomez seconded the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously. IV. Old Business. Chair Bob asked commission members who were available to join him for City Council's Periodic Review of the Human Relations Commission. Five boards were scheduled for review at the July 24th Study Session . Each board will be allocated 20 minutes for a short presentation and questions by Council. V. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.