22
Los Angeles Establishes
Service Rating Program
The following was taken from the
News Bulletin of Public Administration
Clearing House.
Los Angeles recently installed a serv
ice rating program, employing sorting
and tabulating machines, to evaluate
the on-the-job performance of its 12,-
000 municipal employees, the Interna
tional City Managers* Association re
ports.
Twice each year ratings will be made
of job performance to guide employee
advancements under the new salary
standardization plan. The new salary
plan, made effective at the same time,
creates a five-step salary scale for each
position, with advancement from step
one to step two automatic after one
year’s service, but with further ad
vancement depending upon the em
ployee’s performance.
The employees will be rated accord
ing to the quantity of work, quality of
work, application, suitability, personal
qualifications, and over-all value to the
Board of Directors Meeting
(Continued from Page 21)
closed and a unanimous vote was cast
for Mr. Ford.
Since Mr. Query has been elected
President of the Association, Stanley
Morris who was Alternate District D i
rector will take his place as District
Director. Mr. E. O. Bainter was nom
inated as Alternate District Director for
District No. 2. Mr. Paul Gemmell was
also nominated. Mr. Bainter was elected.
Changing the membership cards so
that a new card could be issued every
year was discussed but no action was
taken inasmuch as secretaries can issue
new cards now if they desire.
There being no further business the
meeting adjourned.
department. The ratings are made di
rectly on specially designed tabulating
cards to permit mass sorting and scor
ing in a matter of a few hours. An av
erage score of 70 or more qualifies the
employee for advancement to the next
salary step for his position. Scores of
less than 70 will hold up any advance
ment for further review.
Ratings will be made by the immedi
ate supervisor, a reviewing officer, and
a rating committee. Discussion of the
employee’s final score between the em
ployee and the rating officer is planned
in order to promote self-improvement
on the part of the employee. Employees
who believe they are unfairly rated may
ask for a review by the department
head, and a committee chairman from
the civil service board. If he is still not
satisfied with his score, the employee
may next appeal to the civil service
board.
The departmental personnel commit
tee may also make recommendations to
the civil service board regarding any
personnel matters leading to the im
provement of the service or of employee
working conditions.
STA TE O FFICIALS SA LA RY
IN C REA SES APPROVED
In all, more than $21,000,000 was
voted for pay raises in California. The
latest appropriation, $12,000,000 was
for a $15-a-month increase for some
22,000 state employees who had not re
ceived special raises in the past year.
Another $7,000,000 was set aside for
special pay raises to be determined by
the state personnel board.
Salaries of superior judges, appellate
judges and supreme court justices were
raised under the terms of one bill. All
elective state officers’ salaries were set
at $10,000 a year under another bill.
Nearly $1,000,000 for the next two
years was voted for various heads of
state departments and state commis-