The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 08111998 - C103 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra }r FROM: Phil Batchelor ` Costa County Administrator August 11, 1998 County DATE: rs SUBJECT: Response to Grand Jury Report#9803 Affirmative Action in County hiring SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION($)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION(S): Adopt proposed response and forward to The Presiding Judge of Superior Court. BAC_K_GRQt)N1D'IREASON(UFOR RECOMMEN ,TIONf l: The Grand Jury filed report#9803 on May 14, 1998. In accordance with Penal Code Section 933.05 the County Administrator filed his response to the findings and recommendations with the Presiding Judge. The Board of Supervisors as the governing body of the County mustalso file its response. a CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON----- August t 17 r 199 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED Z OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: I NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED August 11, ',1998 Superior Court Presiding Judge PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Grand Jury Foreperson SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel �� M382 (10/88) BY DEPUTY Board of Supervisors Response to Grand Jury Report No. 9803 Affirmative Action in County Hiring Comments on Findings: 1. Finding:Contra Costa County in September 1997 suspended its affirmative action program in awarding construction contracts. However,the County continues to use affirmative action goals in personnel hiring and promotion, operating under the 1975 Consent Decree. Comment: Agree, but note that later in 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted an Interim Outreach Program to encourage opportunities for affirmative action in its contract programs. 2. Finding: The Consent Decree states in part: "It is the goal of the parties that the percentage of minorities and females employed in each job classification and each department in county employment reflect the supply of qualified members of minority groups and females in the workforce in Contra Costa County." The imbalance is deemed to exist when employment numbers are less than 80%of the number representative of the percentage in the population qualified for a given job classification who "are willing to apply for county employment." Comment: Agree. 3. Finding: Census data are used to determine numbers of minority and female workers available in the population of Contra Costa County. Census information also is used by the state Employment Development Department(EDD) for affirmative action purposes. Comment: Disagree. The Consent Decree provides: "The percentages of qualified minorities and females in the work force in Contra Costa County shall be determined from the most recent available State of California Employment Development Department Affirmative Action Data. If such data does not provide information adequate to make a clear determination as to the work force composition for a given job classification, the parties shall rely upon other information which shall be given weight in accordance with the objectivity experience,and expertise supporting it." The information used by the State Employment Department is not known to this office. 4. Finding: The Consent Decree requires recruitment efforts designed to attract minority and female applicants. The County has developed an outreach plan which includes distribution of job announcements to about 1200 outlets including colleges and community groups, as well as to EDD offices. Staff members work with minority groups and maintain job postings in special locations to reach minority populations. Comment: Agree GJBDRPT(8/98) 1 S. Finding: The Consent Decree requires the County to have an Affirmative Action Officer. That position currently is filled and is supported by clerical staff. In addition, members of the Human Resources Department staff provided administrative support for the affirmative action program, and each County department has an affirmative action coordinator. Comment: Agree 6. Finding: "The County . . . " "These labor force percentage goals were applied for each group against County workforce realization percentages in each of eight occupational categories--officials/administrators, professionals,technicians,protective service workers, para-professionals, administrative support workers, skilled craft workers, and service/maintenance workers." Comment: Disagree in part. The first paragraph is correct. The second paragraph regarding labor force percentage goals being applied to occupational categories is not correct. The Affirmative Action Progress report presents data by race/ethnic groups and females and compares them against the various occupational categories and the County labor force goal by race/ethnic and gender. 7. Finding: The Affirmative Action Progress Report applies the overall percentages of race/gender groups in the labor force to each County job category in determining whether representation goals were met. Census data for Contra Costa County by'race/gender and job category are available but are not cited in the report. Census Department occupational categories do not entirely match County job categories. Comment: Agree. 8. Finding:"The hiring process for some County jobs includes "stratified random selection." For example, 2,889 candidates . . . " Comment: Disagree in part. Stratified random selection is applied after applicants have been screened as meeting the minimum qualifications. 9. Finding: The Consent Decree provides that either parry after five years may apply to the Court for an order vacating the Decree on the ground that no further Court supervision is required. The Decree has been in effect more than 22 years. Comment: Agree Comments on Conclusions: 1. Conclusion. By the County's description, the affirmative action program "has been successful." This statement is supported by overall workforce numbers by race/gender, although not necessarily by job category for each race/gender group. It is fair to conclude that further supervision by the Court is not necessary, which is the reason cited in the Consent Decree for requesting lifting the agreement. GJBDRPT(8/98) 2 Comment: Disagree. The Affirmative Action Program has been successful in meeting many of its goals; however,all groups are not fully represented. The Consent Decree's goal (A-1) is representation of minorities and females employed in each job classification and each department. Goals have not been met in some job classes and in some departments. 2. Conclusion. Removal of staffing and other requirements of the Consent Decree which have financial costs could result in redirection of resources. Comment: Disagree in part. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) remains a Federal legal requirement. Staff (Affirmative Action Officer and Secretary) implements EEO and other Federal, State, and local requirements and programs. Continued operation under the Consent Decree shelters the County against many EEO claims. Conclusion: In some jobs,the quality of applicants is sacrificed for affirmative action. For example,Firefighter candidates with higher than minimum qualifications may be passed over no matter what race/gender group they belong to in the torturous hiring process. Candidates selected in the "stratified random selection"used might have education above the high school level or job-related qualifications such as firefighter, emergency medical technician or paramedic certification for which they receive no credit. Candidates who— selected randomly from the protected race/gender groups and who have greater than minimum qualifications can cite them in the later interview stages of the hiring process. Other jobs for which "stratified random selection" has been used include Institutional Services Aide, Custodian, and Laborer. Comment: Disagree. The quality of applicants is not sacrificed for affirmative action. Stratified Random Selection is to reduce the size of applicant pools to manageable proportions. Several examinations have 2,000 to 3,000 applicants and this makes it impossible for the County forces to assess the relative quality of every application. Stratified Random Selection is a fair procedure to limit the number of applicants who are evaluated in detail without adversely affecting the proportionate representations of females and minorities. The example given, firefighters, is a good example. Once applicants are screened based on their meeting the minimum qualifications, everyone is given the opportunity of being selected based on their representation in the qualified applicant pool. If 3% of the applicants are Asian,4% are Hispanics, 5% are African Americans, 7% American Indians, 80% White,20% females,and 80% males and the County wants to test from the applicant size of 3,000 only 300 applicants,the percentage of applicants from each group is maintained among the 300 applicants. After the written test is given and scored and the County wants to interview 100 applicants, those same percentages are maintained.', Everyone is given an equal chance at being selected based on their representation in their applicant pool. GJBDRPT(8198) 3 Responses to Recommendations: 1. Recommendation: The County petition federal district court to lift the 1975 Consent Decree. Response: The recommendation will not be implemented. The Consent Decree operates to insure County compliance with Federal EEO requirements on an ongoing basis. 2. Recommendation: The County continue to recruit broadly to attract candidates from all groups in the population. Response: The recommendation will be implemented in the future as it has been in the past. 3. Recommendation: The County hire and promote the best qualified candidates, regardless of gender and race or ethnicity. Response: The recommendation will be implemented in the future as it has been in the past. GJBDRPT(8/98) 4