In addition to trying to sell naming rights to everything that stands, may I suggest that Councillor Merulla and the rest of his elected colleagues spend at least as much time on things such as determining why we're going to replace all of the nearly 650 City employees who will be eligible for retirement over the next 3 years? A 5% cut in those numbers (which although challenging, is not an unreasonable target given our fiscal challenges and personally, I would double that to 10%) would be a reduction in staff of 32. If they each were paid, on average, $50,000 (a conservative estimate if one also factors in benefits, etc.) that's $1.6 million. If we also try to get to the bottom of why our absenteeism rates are so high, and getting higher, we would trim at least another $1 million. If we focused on how we can improve the extent to which staff are engaged in a common vision, we would see improvements in productivity, retention, and a decrease in absenteeism.
If we actually got on with the task of immediately implementing a performance management system (rather than inching it along) so we could set goals, focus efforts, reward accomplishments, and promote the best from within, we would see improvements in all of the above. On the other hand, rather than holding Mr. Murray's feet, and the feet of his senior management team, to the fire, I suppose we could just try and get Tim Horton's to pay for a few floral displays.
Come on Sam. Get focused on the high impact stuff, not just the high visibility stuff. Better management is what we need and we need it now. If you think you can produce the same results (reduction in costs and increases in productivity) by spending your time focusing on naming rights versus doing the tough work of ensuring we have a well-managed, motivated, focused, and productive workforce, then show me the numbers and we'll talk. Now, if you're prepared to do both at the same time and with the same level of intensity, be my guest. If you do both, may I suggest that fore very dollar you raise through sponsorships that a dollar be reduced from staff budgets. That's a two-for-one saving. The more you bring in, the LESS managers have to spend and the MORE we're able to keep taxes down. Just a concept you might want to consider.
Please note: there are two links inserted in Mr. Crawford's comments. These links have been inserted by The Hamiltonian staff and were not in Mr. Crawford's text. We inserted these links as Mr. Crawford's comments align with previous material written here.
Comments to Mr. Crawford's perspective are welcome. As per our policy, only respectful comments will be published.
Please note: there are two links inserted in Mr. Crawford's comments. These links have been inserted by The Hamiltonian staff and were not in Mr. Crawford's text. We inserted these links as Mr. Crawford's comments align with previous material written here.
Comments to Mr. Crawford's perspective are welcome. As per our policy, only respectful comments will be published.
Graham. What you are suggesting and what is suggested in the linked articles, is very needed, and needs a certain degree of sophistication in leadership at the political and bureaucratic level. I'll stop there.
ReplyDeleteSorce
Well done, Graham. I'm always cheered when someone adds something substantive to the dialogue.
ReplyDeleteExcept... We're not really having a 'dialogue' yet, are we? I mean, a great piece by Mr. Crawford, pointed comments on this subject here and elsewhere...but is there an actual conversation taking place? Or will this issue...as (seemingly) with HWT...simply fade away because the we don't insist on an actual dialogue taking place?
I trust that someone is keeping tabs on what's been going down since the last election. I mean, if the residents of Hamilton (the 'employers') are to assess the performance of Councillors (the 'employees'), then we'd better have an accurate record at hand come the next election, right?
Right...?
I do not know how you would have dialogue. Town Halls can only do so much. I would rather see citizens come up with measurables and evaluate outcomes. That would be more meaningful and a better gauge of progress.
ReplyDeleteI also hope that closer to the election, The Hamiltonian will produce a summary of the major issues that have been dealt with over the last four years and how they were dealt with. For example, a link to the infamous Sept 6th play, the vision question that hardly any clr responded to, the performance management issue or lack thereof etc etc.
Sorce
Prior to amalgamation the City of Hamilton and the Regional government employed close to 5,000 employees serving a population of 500,000 people. Today after amalgamation City of Hamilton employees close to 10,000 employees serving a population of 525,000 people. Close to 80 percent of the municipal budget is expended on compensation for municipal employees. According to the City Manager Chris Murray on the Bill Kelly show today, the City of Hamilton has an annual infrastructure deficit of $200,000,000.00. Do the the math!
ReplyDeleteThe ratio seems to be way of of whack and many don't have a performance agreement according to the article. So we are not getting our money's worth. Thats the way I see it
Delete