It was moved by Justice McEvers, seconded by Judge Hagerty, to approve the minutes. An
editorial suggestion was made by Justice McEvers to include the full sentence in the final motion
striking the language that would be removed and underlining the language to be added. The
It was moved by Judge Hagerty, seconded by Justice Sandstrom, to approve the request.
The motion carried and the request will be forwarded to the Supreme Court for
Electronic Court Recorder Training Plan Sally Holewa drew the members attention to a memo written by Kim Nelsen, who serves as chair
of the Digital Recording Workgroup. She explained that the memo covers two topics. First, the
recorders are asking for clarification on whether they will need to be recertified and making an
argument for why recertification should not be required. Second, they are asking for some
modifications to the training plan they submitted to the Board last year. Ms. Holewa suggested
that the two requests be treated separately. She said that the issue of recertification is properly
before the Board because if it were to be required, the position description would have to be
modified. She said that the issue of changes to the training plan are outside the scope of what the
Personnel Policy Board has been involved with in the past. She explained that, as things
currently stand, the training plan exists in somewhat of a no-man’s land. It was originally
developed by the Digital Recording Workgroup when we were contemplating building our own
testing requirements. Because that was a project that was under the auspices of the Board, the
training plan was brought forward and approved by the Board. However, we’ve since gone in a
different direction. She said that normally the Director of Education would be handling such
things as choosing workbooks and hiring appropriate speakers for conference. She suggested
that rather than taking any action on these issues that the entire work plan be referred to the
Director of Education for standard implementation. It was the consensus of the Board to forward the plan to the education department to implement. In response to a question from Susan Hoffer asking if the recertification process would contain
any different material or training, Ms. Holewa stated it is her understanding that it would
essentially be a retest. Ms. Holewa stated that we currently do not require recertification for the court re It was moved by Susan Hoffer, seconded by Judge Hagerty, to not require recertification.
The motion carried.
Sick Leave Policy
For the purposes of discussion, it was moved by Judge Hagerty, seconded by Justice
Sandstrom, that 10%of the accrued sick leave as of January 1 of each year be calculated
and that this 10% could be used throughout the year.
Ms. Holewa suggested the second paragraph in D.3.b. be amended to read as follows: If allowed,
the additional sick leave is calculated by takingmay not exceed 10% of an employee’s accrued
sick leave balance onas of
The motion carried and will be sent out to employees for comment.
Physical Requirement Section in Job Classifications Sally Holewa recalled at the last meeting the Board raised concerns with the wording of the
physical requirements under the job classifications and asked Ms. Klein to do some research on
the language. Ms. Holewa said instead of trying to substitute language for all of the different
verbs, she suggested leaving the language as is and add the language “or be able to perform the
duties in some other acceptable manner.” She said for example if someone is able to perform the
job without reaching or grasping, it is acceptable as long as they can get the job done. It was the consensus of the Board to have Ms. Klein insert the language in a few job
classifications for review at the next meeting.