Laserfiche WebLink
0 0 <br />BOOK 21 PAGE 34, <br />addresses of local National Guardsmen serving oversees and mail Christmas <br />cards to them. Upon a vote, the results were as follows: <br />Aye: Brown, Kelly, Lemmond, Paschal, Reives, Shook, and Stevens <br />Nay: None <br />The Chairman ruled the motion had been adopted unanimously. <br />Commissioner Lemmond discussed with the Board Sections 3.3 <br />(Eligibility) and 3.4 (Separation from Service) of the Lee County Personnel Policy <br />as it relates to longevity pay for employees with at least fifteen (15) years of <br />service should they be unable to return to work for medical reasons. Human <br />Resource Director Joyce McGehee discussed with the Board a recent survey she <br />had completed from other cities and counties addressing their method for paying <br />longevity pay when employees leave employment. Discussion centered around <br />an employee at the Sheriff's Department that retired a few days short of her <br />anniversary date; therefore, denying her of her longevity pay because she was <br />not employed on her anniversary date. It was noted that Sheriffs Department <br />staff sometimes leave their positions because they have no choice when a new <br />Sheriff is elected, as was the recent case when Sheriff Tracy Carter was elected. <br />County Manager David Smitherman suggested longevity payments be made one <br />time a year somewhere around Christmas and not on the employees anniversary <br />date, as is the current Lee County policy. Commissioner Reives moved that Ms. <br />Gayle Freeman, former Administrative Assistant with the Sheriff's Department, <br />who retired on November 30, 2006, be granted her prorated longevity pay. Upon <br />a vote, the results were as follows: <br />Aye: Brown, Kelly, Lemmond, Paschal, Reives, Shook, and Stevens <br />Nay: None <br />The Chairman ruled the motion had been adopted unanimously. <br />Commissioner Reives moved that future longevity cases involving <br />retirement and law enforcement personnel be treated on a case-by-case basis <br />and that staff address all other areas of longevity and bring to the Board of <br />Commissioners for a recommendation. After further discussion, Commissioner <br />Stevens moved to defer consideration of the matter until staff can bring a <br />recommendation back to the Board for consideration. Upon a vote of <br />Commissioner Stevens motion, the results were as follows: <br />Aye: Brown, Kelly, Lemmond, Paschal, Shook, and Stevens <br />Nay: Reives <br />The Chairman ruled the motion had been adopted by a six to one vote. <br />7 <br />