PEOPLE FIRST CHANGE REVIEW BOARD



PEOPLE FIRST CHANGE REVIEW BOARD

MEETING NOTES

Date: August 15, 2006

Time: 10:00 AM – 12:00 Noon

Location: 4040 Esplanade Way, Room 225F

Members in attendance:

Lee Ann Korst DMS Dennis King DMS

Mark Helms DCA Phil Spooner AWI

David DiSalvo DCF Dave Tepper DOS

Lane Fenner CVG Rene Knight DHSMV

John Bennett DFS Bob Nave CVG

David Faulkenberry DMS Linda Lieblong FSU

Non-Members in attendance:

Cathy Jones AUD Libby Farmer DMS

Members not in attendance:

Ralph Kiessig DOC Paul Nichols LEG

Dave Pepper State Courts JoAnne Leznoff EOG

Joe McVaney LEG

Welcome and Introductions -

Lee Ann introduced Bob Nave to the group. Mr. Nave is the new Vice President of Operations, Public Sector, for Convergys. Mr. Nave brings 27 years of Florida State Government experience to his new role as project director for the public sector initiatives.

Follow up –

No comments received

PF Work Plan -

Secretary Lewis, LeeAnn, David, and Dennis met with Convergys executives last week to address the status of the Service, Activities and Task deliverables outlined in the Contract. Lane, Bob, David and Dennis will be meeting this afternoon to discuss those items which have been delivered but are not acceptable and the items that have not been delivered. Lee Ann also indicated that upon review of the matrix, some items are no longer necessary and may be removed from the list. The resulting list of items will be reviewed and discussed at the next CRB meeting before finalizing the work plan with Convergys.

Mantis List Prioritization –

The group informed LeeAnn that once they began to review the items, it became too difficult to prioritize and to narrow the items down to the top 5 in each category. Dennis distributed the prioritized list based on the responses received. He explained that the shaded items were those in which the total score of all responses equaled 8 or greater or issues that 3 or more agencies identified as a priority.

Lee Ann asked the group if the issues needed to be discussed in a separate meeting. She reiterated the PAR and Data Warehouse are the priorities but that we do not want to loose sight of these other issues.

It was decided at the conclusion of the meeting, that the members would review the highlighted issues and provide feedback as to whether they agree that issue is a priority. Members were asked to provide the feedback to Be Whitfield [beatriz.whitfield@dms.] by Friday, August 18th. Once we get the responses back, we will update the list and discuss at the next meeting.

University Items –

DMS had a meeting with representatives from various universities to hear their issues. LeeAnn reviewed the issues and asked the group whether they were also experiencing problems with the issue:

a. Early Effective Dates: BRD is being drafted by Tom Lockridge to correct problem. Affects all agencies.

b. Access to DW Premium History: Personnel needs to see more than 12 months of premium history – needs to go back to “go-live” or before.

c. Processing of Refunds (mass vs. individual): mass processing takes too long.

Linda indicated that all universities have different payroll systems so that not all of them experience the same problems but most are experiencing these problems that need to be addressed.

Electronic Personnel Files -

David distributed the BRD that has been drafted and sent to the Personnel Officers for review on the electronic personnel files. After the walk through at the Service Center, most participants got a feel for the challenges faced by the staff and an appreciation for the ‘power’ of the technology. Based on last meeting discussion and review of the documents, the index categories have been identified as:

• Hiring, Pay, Leave, Other

• Benefits

• Job Performance Information

• Confidential/Sealed Information

• Miscellaneous

Preliminary feedback received from the personnel officers indicates that these categories are acceptable. However, discussion was entertained that the Hiring, Pay, Leave, etc. category may be too large and cumbersome for effective employee self-service. The group asked that HRM consider splitting up the Hiring, Pay, Leave, Other category to create a separate category for either Leave or for the Hiring documents. The members stated that medical information has to be kept in a separate file and they prefer maintaining those files in-house.

The members asked HRM to explore the possibility of each agency scanning their own documents. Several agencies stated that they currently have scanning capability; therefore, we may only need to address compatibility issues. The group asked DMS and Convergys to consider this option for a pilot.

Discussion ensued regarding:

• how the indexing would be handled

• information needed on the facsimile cover sheet to transmit files to Convergys, and

• the list of personnel documents and how they will be indexed in the system.

David indicated that HRM will begin working with the Personnel Officers on developing a rule to define what documents would be included in the ‘official personnel file’. The documents will be identified in generic terms since agencies have different titles for the same type of document.

It was decided that a conference call would be set up on Friday, August 18th to further discuss the indexing categories and the indexing process.

LeeAnn stated that the target date for implementation is September 1. The members expressed concern over the aggressive timeline for implementation but LeeAnn stated that the date is indicative of starting the process. LeeAnn anticipates a statewide release date instead of a phased in release, which will be around the first of the year (2007) for employee access. The September time frame will incorporate Hs and As only. LeeAnn indicated that a pilot of the new procedures was being considered with DMS possibly serving as the pilot agency. The People First! Team will look into the feasibility of scanning/indexing documents at the agency level.

Releases –

Dennis distributed and discussed the two spreadsheets with a summary of the items and the anticipated release dates of August 29, September 2 and October 28.

• Mark Helms asked if there was any notification that needs to be issued to employees for the implementation of the non-resident alien indicator. Dennis will ask Jimmy to work with John Bennett, BOSP, on the communication to employees.

Follow-Up: Jimmy is in discussion with John, however, they do not believe there are employee specific communications needed in general, only to actual Non-Resident Aliens. However, he will still send out a communication to the PO’s early next week documenting this.

• Elaine inquired when the UAT for the 160 and 192 hours employees would be taking place. Dennis stated that he would ask Suzetta will send out the schedule.

Follow-Up: Jimmy and Suzetta are planning to schedule UAT participants first of next week, which will include 160 and 192 hours employee reps. Additionally, they are planning to offer training specific to the needs of those employees and create a video for them, and Sharron is developing a QRC.

Hiring Issues with Convergys –

An Alert was recently sent reminding the Personnel Officers about the contractual language on hiring Convergys employees. Lane stated that the attrition rate at the Service Center is extremely high that they are concerned that it may impact the delivery of service. They do not want to hinder employees from bettering themselves; however, they need to find a balance. Lane asked that if an agency is considering a Convergys employee for a position, that they provide him notice as soon as possible so that they can begin planning to back fill the position. Lane asked the CRB members to send a reminder to their supervisors and managers of the hiring restriction. Requests for an exemption to hire a Convergys employee should be directed to Lane, and should be in writing.

CRB members asked Lane to ensure that Convergys staff are well-informed and fully understand the contractual requirements and their employment restrictions, in terms that they are not to apply for a position in state government within 12 months of separating from Convergys. It was pointed out that the HR offices in decentralized agencies rely on the hiring managers to perform the hiring activities, which is in the spirit of manager self-service, and makes it difficult to monitor all hiring packages. CRB members also suggested that Convergys put controls in place to minimize the ability of Convergys staff to apply for state positions, since they are using their own system (People First!) to apply.

Open Enrollment Issues –

UAT for open enrollment took place over the weekend. Tom Lockridge and Dick Barnum have reported that it went well. They are hosting daily conference calls with Convergys to resolve any problems. Open Enrollment begins on September 18 through October 18. September 12th will be the first opportunity for employees to review their data.

Other:

Jimmy has been asked to assist in resolving PAR issues. Cheri and Jimmy set up focus group meetings to begin discussions. In addition, DRAFT requirements have been delivered to Convergys for review. Dennis will check with MJ to see when the Data Warehouse focus group will get started.

Rene stated that during a recent audit, they were cited for employees’ ability to approve their own timesheet. They had instances where employees with “B” and “E” role codes had approved their own timesheet. She called the Service Center that they said that it was a known glitch in the system.

Follow- Up: There are two situations in place here:

1. Prior to 1.B there was a system glitch where selected timesheets went straight into an approved status. This happened for various role code users, includes E, M, L, etc. We believe this issue was resolved with the 1.B release (at least I have not found any since 1.B). However, if agencies have post 1.B occurrences for a E, M or L users, Jimmy would like to know.

2. A, B, H and T users currently have access to approve their own timesheets. We attempted to address with the 1.B release and in fact made it more difficult to accomplish, however, we do have an outstanding item here. The requirements to correct this were given to Convergys as part of the Security enhancements.

Meeting was adjourned at 11:58 am.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download