KU classified employees still adjusting to system / LJWorld.com

Lawrence and Douglas county

Worker reflects on turmoil leading up to new classification

September 1, 2006

Three years ago, Kathy Coffey was an outspoken opponent of Kansas University's classified employees' departure from the state civil service system.

She since has had to fight to keep her job at KU only to be sidelined to another position, she said.

"If you have a history and you're labeled as a problem or a troublemaker or someone who does not go with the flow, then you will be targeted," she said. "I don't have any faith in the university system. I have a great deal of faith in the civil service system."

It's been a year since KU's more than 1,400 classified staff departed from the state civil service system. And though many maintain that support staff now fares better, some are still getting used to the system that brings with it a new pay and appeals process.

"There have been some adjustment issues," said Kathy Jansen, a procurement officer and former president of Classified Senate. "That is to be expected with any major switch."

The first fight

Coffey first came to KU in 1979. She's been a kitchen helper. She's mowed lawns and pulled weeds for landscaping. And she spent more than a decade in the sheet metal shop.

KU several years ago began discussions about a possible departure from the civil service system. The move would allow KU to pay employees better, officials said at the time.

But Coffey, co-coordinator of a coalition favoring civil service, battled the change. She sent e-mails to every lawmaker in the state and she spoke publicly about her concerns.

Photo by Richard Gwin

Kathy Coffey opposed a proposal to move Kansas University classified employees from the state's civil service system. Since then, she was fired by KU but appealed to the state and was reinstated. She now works at the KU power plant.

Coffey's protestations didn't swing the situation in her favor. In May 2003, a vote to leave the system resulted in a tie, 545 to 545. In another vote months later, 623 workers voted to create a new employee system at KU, while the pro-civil service side received 532 votes.

Coffey was vocal until the end.

After the last vote, she told the Journal-World: "If they knock the civil service regulations from the whole thing, that leaves the university accountable to who exactly in their decision-making? Who decides if they're dealing with us in a fair and unbiased manner?"

A year later, Coffey was fired.

Fired

A subordinate had alleged Coffey had made him use improper materials on the job. And there were concerns that she was a micromanager. In November 2004, KU fired her.

With the university not yet changed to a new employee system, Coffey appealed to the state civil service board.

The board determined Coffey should, if she chose, be reinstated in her position.

Coffey never returned to the sheet metal shop. Instead, she said, she was moved to the power plant, where she holds a supervisory position, as a skilled trade supervisor, but looks over nothing but the large boilers.

"They want me out of sight, out of mind," she said.

Coffey said she believes KU would have handled the situation differently if she hadn't been a vocal proponent of the civil service system. And she believes she wouldn't be working at KU today without the civil service board.

"I would have been fired," she said. "I would never have had a fair hearing."

Jansen said she wasn't aware of anyone once vocal about the issue who has been retaliated against.

"It could happen," she said. "I'm not going to say it couldn't. I just don't know of any instances."

Salaries

Before the departure from civil service, the debate often was framed as a money issue. Classified employees' wages lagged behind average wages for similar work in other states and pay increases given to faculty.

After KU workers left the system, the state has ramped up support for classified employees.

Now at KU, some are getting bigger raises than state classified employees and some aren't.

"If you look at the history of civil service raises, this year is an aberration," said Mike Auchard, a carpenter senior at KU and member of the University Support Staff Senate.

KU, for the second year in a row, gave support staff 3 percent increases across the board and added 1.5 percent increases to the pool for merit raises. Merit money is given to those who "meet expectations" in their evaluations.

"I think our commitment to them is: Your fortunes will rise and fall with the university," said Lindy Eakin, KU vice provost for administration and finance. "You won't do worse than the university does . ... We should be able to do slightly better than the state over the time."

The figures don't mean every employee receives a 4.5 percent increase. The average increase was 4.5 percent, but increases range from 3.5 percent to 7 percent, Eakin said.

The average salary for support staff employees is $29,700.

Jansen said merit increases have spurred an excitement among staff.

"I think people are eager to see what they can do to improve their merit status," she said.

If the KU employees had remained in the civil service system, they'd receive a 4 percent increase this year with no ties to merit.

The state earlier this summer increased base salaries 1.5 percent and also plans a 2.5 percent step increase in September.

Jansen said she believes KU employees' actions spurred the state raises.

"They basically happened because of what we did," she said. "They decided they probably needed to take some action for the rest of the civil servants."

Appeals

The departure from the civil service system also brought a new appeals process to support staff.

In the civil service system, appeals ultimately were taken to a body off KU's campus. But now support staff grievances work their way to a KU board nominated by the University Support Staff Senate and appointed by the provost. Three of the five appeals board members are support staff.

"It's not an outside body anymore," said Dennis Constance, president of the University Support Staff Senate. But "it's one that's pretty heavily weighted toward support staff."

Auchard said he's more concerned about the loss of subpoena power. In the previous system, employees with grievances could subpoena others to testify about issues, but that is no longer the case, he said.

"It's possible that a witness might get cold feet," he said.

Since July 1, 2004, 247 appeals have gone to the state civil service board, and 24 of those have been reversed or modified. In the same time frame, 15 cases have come from KU employees, and two of those have been modified.

Three appeals were taken to KU's new support staff appeals board in fiscal 2006. Two of those cases were affirmed without a change in outcome, and one appeal resulted in a change to the original decision.

Coffey called KU's board a kangaroo court and said she's concerned it doesn't ensure a fair process for all employees.

"It's not for the working man," she said. "It is for the administrative branch of the university."

But Jansen said it will take time to get used to the new system.

"There's always going to be a certain level of distrust," she said. "It's in the nature of bosses and workers. ... If the promises that were made are honored, the trust issue will become a smaller and smaller issue as time goes on."

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

1 September 2006
at 4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BD711 (Anonymous) says…

Sounds to me like Ms. Coffey wants to have a job, but does not want to have any of the responsibilities (like the potential to get fired if you do not meet expectations) that go with it. You know Ms. Coffey we live in a free market, if you are not happy with the job you have you could take classes at the university and get a different job. What a new, cutting edge idea!
1 September 2006
at 4:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shockchalk (Anonymous) says…

I have worked at KU for many years and I am very pleased with the new system. We are finally getting some decent raises and the merit system does away with the “one size fits all” attitude of the past. If anyone needs proof of this, they don't have to look any further than our own state legislature. After years of 1-1.5% raises, that were often deferred for 6 months, they miraculously came up with a 4% increase this year! A direct response to the 4.5% increase that KU gave to satisfactory employees the previous year.

As far as Mrs. Coffey's comments. Her dismissal had nothing to do with the new system and everything to do with her complete disregard for the University's policies as well as their students safety. Installing the wrong equipment on projects and asking her employees to look the other way? Does this sound like the type of employee we need at KU. If she dislikes the system so much, perhaps she should look for employment elsewhere. Either way, it's time for her to accept responsibility and quit blaming others.

The employees should be proud of this new system and join together to support it, not destroy it.
2 September 2006
at 12:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kidjustice (Anonymous) says…

I am a employee at K.U. and Mrs.Coffey should have been fired for misuse and theft of University supplies.She went from a kitchen helper to a ground keeper to a supervisior in the sheet metal shop?How did she ever get to be a supervisior in a trade she knew nothing about?Hope they keep close tabs on the inventory in the power plant.They should had assigned he to guard and watch the fire hydrants on campus but some of them would probably come up missing.
8 September 2006
at 1:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tiger1983 (Anonymous) says…

Not everyone who is leaving comments on this particular article do not have all of their facts. The University of Kansas doesn't have comparable wages for the position that Mrs. Coffey held prior to her termination. If they did I am sure that more applicants would have shown interest in that position. As for her career changes at the university, she had been a member of the sheet metal shop for many years prior to becoming supervisor. The University, that you all are so loyal to, obviously felt her to be the most qualified for the position. As a former student of the Univesity of Kansas, I agree completely with Mrs. Coffey. This system is not the best for the employees. Ms. Jansen's comment about the University officials “not targeting people” who spoke out against the current system is not completely accurate. Mrs. Coffey is a prime example. Get all of your facts straight before you start attacking people. Everyone is entitled to speak their beliefs, and that's what Mrs. Coffey is doing.
11 September 2006
at 11:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shockchalk (Anonymous) says…

You are right. One of the people who doesn't have all of the facts is you tiger. Those of us who work at KU know all to well the inequity in wages. Mrs. Coffee knew nothing about the sheet metal trade until she started working in that shop. The same amount that she knows about her current position. An easy argument could be made that if she really “knew” her job, she wouldn't have lost it after some serious, poor, decision making. This new system is certainly better than the old one that you are so quick to defend. Maybe if you were a KU employee, you would have more of the facts you so desperately seem to write about. Plenty of people spoke out about the new system and none of them were “targeted” by the University. The facts speak for themselves and Mrs. Coffee needs to own up to her poor decisions and stop pointing the finger.
15 September 2006
at 5:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tiger1983 (Anonymous) says…

Shockchalk, you're hiding behind anonymity, and running amok making unfounded, not to mention unproven accusations against Ms. Coffey. Her reinstatement was clearly a sign that the Civil Service Board does not agree with your accusations of her complete disregard for the University's Policies or students saftey. Why should she “look for work elsewhere”? Being a state employee with many years service herself, perhaps in the University's endeavor to fire her, the obvious questions were never asked about the situation leading to that point. The University needs to accept responsibility for clearly, according to the ruling of the Civil Service Board, jumping to the wrong conclusion and acting inappropriately.

Kid-
I was unaware that theft of University supplies was issue for her firing- What have you read or who have you spoken with to get an idea of this magnitude?
You are aware that making unfounded accusations along these lines is considered slander in this state…
21 September 2006
at 4:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shockchalk (Anonymous) says…

Isn't it interesting how often we accuse others of the very thing we are guilty of? It is actually you tiger, that is hiding behind anonymity and running amok with gossip and unsubstantiated comments. On the other hand, I have nothing to hide and my comments are based on something you are sadly in need of……the truth. I know the facts behind the University's actions and she is fortunate to have ANY job on this campus. In the private sector, she would have been fired many years before this last chain of events. There didn't need to be any conclusions jumped to at all because the facts were ample and plenty. I believe she should look for employment elsewhere only because of her obvious dislike for her employer and her complete denial of responsibility. We learn more from our mistakes than our success and unfortunately, Mrs. Coffey has learned nothing. There has been plenty of things “proven” in this case and you, Tiger, have proved that you are short on facts and long on gossip.