Below is a letter that I was just forwarded via email: it's from Alfred Elder, Human Resources Director of the City of Atlanta.
Before anyone dashes off a seething reply to Mr. Elder's letter -- which at first seems to scold Tom Coffin for a curmudgeonly management style -- take a look at what his letter really says.
Elder's letter admits that Mr. Coffin first started criticizing the city arborists' lack of enforcement practices on November 8, 2007, almost a year ago. He states that "the statistics you presented were fairly accurate and support the need for changes in the division's distribution of work."
But if the enforcement inequity Coffin cited was simply a matter of needing to change work distribution, why was the work not redistributed so that Coffin would have been unable to run the report he did in July 2008?
Elder also shows us what happens to a city employee who won't back down from doing the right thing. Even though Elder acknowledges that Coffin provided accurate data to support his allegations, Elder's letter describes how Coffin's manager, Ainsley Caldwell, determined that Coffin's allegations were "without merit" and how Coffin was warned in a rather chilling way to keep silent in the future:
Here's Mr. Elder's letter:
September 29, 2008
Mr. Thomas Coffin
(address withheld)
Dear Mr. Coffin:
The Department of Planning and Community Development, Arborist Division terminated your employment with the City of Atlanta on July 29, 2008. Subsequently, you filed a complaint with the Department of Human Resources (DHR) alleging wrongful termination. The following paragraphs restate the two allegations you cited in support of your claim and provide corresponding responses to same.
Allegation I: "... I was summarily fired from my position as Sr. Field Arhorist for the City of Atlanta. I have heard no complaint about my work from my supervisor, Ainsley Caldwell. The only meeting I have had with Bureau of Building Director Ibrahim Maslamani since I was hired was the one in which I was fired, without cause, without explanation, without a semblance of the process. "
Response: The investigation revealed several documents that identified inappropriate conduct and management's efforts to correct this behavior. In addition to written reprimands in 2004, 2006 (intended) and 2007, and a written warning in 2006, evidence indicates that you received similar feedback on at least three occasions during the last nine months of your employment. The latter is highlighted below and reflects management's efforts to correct apparent communication deficiencies on your part in dealing with your subordinates.
On November 8, 2007, you were cautioned by your supervisor, Ainsley Caldwell, about making unfounded assertions against subordinates. Evidence indicates that in the three weeks preceding your separation, you alleged inspection improprieties on the part of arborists. It also indicates that Mr. Caldwell determined that the allegations were without merit and criticized you as follows, "Let me caution you, such unfounded assertions are disruptive, time consuming, counter productive, and create a divisive working environment among your peers and subordinates; in the future, be very careful as to making such accusations."
On February 5, 2008, Mr. Caldwell criticized your communication style regarding a complaint registered against you by your subordinate, Paul Lewkowicz. Mr. Caldwell counseled you as follows, "I know the role of supervisor is new to you, the tone of this [your] email is not conducive to a harmonious and productive work environment."
On February 11, 2008/March 10, 2008, Mr. Caldwell issued a "Written Warning" to you regarding the manner in which you communicated with another of your subordinates, Michael Franklin. You had criticized Mr. Franklin's work products pertaining to the following addresses: 190 Vanira, [sic] Avenue SE and 156 Howell Street, S W. Mr. Caldwell followed up by inspecting the site and concurred with the initial assessment of Mr. Franklin. Subsequently, he counseled you as follows, " ... I met with you on February 6 and visited the above referenced site (156 Howell Street, SW) on February 8, 2008. ...Mr. Coffin, whenever there are concerns with an inspection or employee, please discuss them with the employee, and if unresolved, bring them to my attention. On previous occasions I have advised you to refrain from making unsubstantiated accusations or statement that negatively point to the character or integrity of staff; consider this memo a written warning to you."
With regard to your meeting with Director Ibrahim Maslamani, you reported directly to the Division Manager (Mr. Caldwell) and would not normally have interacted with Mr. Maslamani. However, on October 19, 2006, Mr. Maslamani objected to you overstepping the boundaries of your authority in issuing peers (other arborists) work assignments. In an e-mail of the same date, he directed you to cease such activities and refer the issues to Mr. Caldwell.
In May/June 2008, you issued Oral Admonishments to all three of your subordinate staff members. The following month, you indicated your intent to issue a second Oral Admonishment to two of the three subordinate staff. In response, the entire subordinate staff requested and was granted a meeting with Mr. Maslamani. Subsequently, management decided to terminate your services.
Allegation II: "Though I know no specifics of my firing, I do know the context. I have been attempting to address (l) the lack of accountability to the tree protection ordinance and building permit postings, and (2) the near total abdication of enforcement of the tree protection ordinance by my colleagues in the more dfficult areas of correction notices on construction sites and the imposition of recompense and penalties for the illegal destruction of trees on either construction sites or private residences."
Response: Evidence indicates that arborists are allowed the flexibility to make independent decisions about the manner in which they choose to enforce provisions of the City's Tree Ordinance. Arborists may elect to use any of the following tools when working with citizens to preserve trees: stop work orders, imposition of tree protection fencing, posting of corrective notices, prescriptions for silvicultural treatments, requirements for 5-year survivability reports and issuance of citations.
You chose to enforce the Tree Ordinance primarily by issuing citations. Your supervisor and subordinates considered this approach extreme and elected to work with citizens in a more collaborative/non-confrontational manner. This point of disagreement, along with your repeated criticism of subordinates, gave rise to recurring conflicts between you and your staff. Ultimately, these conflicts prompted the above referenced meeting between your staff and Mr. Maslamani.
In conclusion, the investigation revealed that your termination had nothing to do with your technical competence and ability to enforce provisions of the Tree Ordinance. To the contrary, supervisors, subordinates and members of the Tree Commission all acknowledged your technical competence. In fact, the statistics you presented were fairly accurate and support the need for changes in the division's distribution of work.
Evidence indicates that you were terminated as a result of an unwillingness or inability to work in a team environment. Whether receiving a directive from a superior, issuing a directive to a subordinate or simply giving a citation to a citizen, you were consistently inflexible in your response to these situations. Specific examples include: challenging your Commissioner's decision to install a new database system by requesting that the Mayor overrule his position; fostering mistrust with your peers by re-inspecting their properties without their knowledge or management's authorization; imposing adverse actions on subordinates as the principal catalyst for change and improvement instead of embracing training and mentoring to cultivate a successful team; and introducing citizens to the City's arboreal initiative by issuing punitive citations as the primary means of tree conservation. Whether intentional or unintentional, you failed to satisfactorily respond to the constructive criticism of supervisors, promote a harmonious work environment for subordinates, and interface in a non-abrasive manner with citizens who objected to your practices.
You were an "At Will" employee and served at the pleasure of the appointing authority. Evidence indicates that your interaction with managers, subordinates and citizens was deficient and warranted correction. Management chose to sever your employment which was within the bounds of discretion granted an appointing authority. Your employment and disciplinary histories failed to justify overturning this decision. Consequently, your termination stands as issued.
This correspondence serves to conclude all investigative and administrative efforts associated with this complaint. A copy of the investigation and executive summary will be forwarded to you at no charge within three business days. Should you desire additional copies, they will be made available at a cost to be determined.
Sincerely,
Alfred Elder, HR Director
c: Gregory J. Giornelli, Chief Operating Officer
Luz Borrero, Deputy Chief Operating Officer
Benita C . Ransom, Commissioner DHR
Steven Cover, Commissioner - DPCD
Ibrahim Maslamani, Bureau Director
Ainsley Caldwell, Arboricultural Manager
Before anyone dashes off a seething reply to Mr. Elder's letter -- which at first seems to scold Tom Coffin for a curmudgeonly management style -- take a look at what his letter really says.
Elder's letter admits that Mr. Coffin first started criticizing the city arborists' lack of enforcement practices on November 8, 2007, almost a year ago. He states that "the statistics you presented were fairly accurate and support the need for changes in the division's distribution of work."
But if the enforcement inequity Coffin cited was simply a matter of needing to change work distribution, why was the work not redistributed so that Coffin would have been unable to run the report he did in July 2008?
Elder also shows us what happens to a city employee who won't back down from doing the right thing. Even though Elder acknowledges that Coffin provided accurate data to support his allegations, Elder's letter describes how Coffin's manager, Ainsley Caldwell, determined that Coffin's allegations were "without merit" and how Coffin was warned in a rather chilling way to keep silent in the future:
Elder also points out that when city employees do not like being verbally criticized for their lack of performance, all they have to do is take it up a level and things will be taken care of. Elder explains to Coffin how it works:Mr. Caldwell determined that the allegations were without merit and criticized you as follows, "Let me caution you, such unfounded assertions are disruptive, time consuming, counter productive, and create a divisive working environment among your peers and subordinates; in the future, be very careful as to making such accusations."
In May/June 2008, you issued Oral Admonishments to all three of your subordinate staff members. The following month, you indicated your intent to issue a second Oral Admonishment to two of the three subordinate staff. In response, the entire subordinate staff requested and was granted a meeting with Mr. Maslamani. Subsequently, management decided to terminate your services.Elder concludes his rather lengthy reproach of Mr. Coffin's performance by saying that:
So, there you have it. Mr. Elder has clearly explained how one can hold onto a management job in Atlanta City Government -- it's as easy as 1-2-3:Whether intentional or unintentional, you failed to satisfactorily respond to the constructive criticism of supervisors, promote a harmonious work environment for subordinates, and interface in a non-abrasive manner with citizens who objected to our practices.
- Always accept criticism from your supervisor, even when he ignores the facts.
- Refrain from taking any corrective action against your unproductive subordinates.
- Do not upset any citizens who object to your practice of enforcing the law.
Here's Mr. Elder's letter:
September 29, 2008
Mr. Thomas Coffin
(address withheld)
Dear Mr. Coffin:
The Department of Planning and Community Development, Arborist Division terminated your employment with the City of Atlanta on July 29, 2008. Subsequently, you filed a complaint with the Department of Human Resources (DHR) alleging wrongful termination. The following paragraphs restate the two allegations you cited in support of your claim and provide corresponding responses to same.
Allegation I: "... I was summarily fired from my position as Sr. Field Arhorist for the City of Atlanta. I have heard no complaint about my work from my supervisor, Ainsley Caldwell. The only meeting I have had with Bureau of Building Director Ibrahim Maslamani since I was hired was the one in which I was fired, without cause, without explanation, without a semblance of the process. "
Response: The investigation revealed several documents that identified inappropriate conduct and management's efforts to correct this behavior. In addition to written reprimands in 2004, 2006 (intended) and 2007, and a written warning in 2006, evidence indicates that you received similar feedback on at least three occasions during the last nine months of your employment. The latter is highlighted below and reflects management's efforts to correct apparent communication deficiencies on your part in dealing with your subordinates.
On November 8, 2007, you were cautioned by your supervisor, Ainsley Caldwell, about making unfounded assertions against subordinates. Evidence indicates that in the three weeks preceding your separation, you alleged inspection improprieties on the part of arborists. It also indicates that Mr. Caldwell determined that the allegations were without merit and criticized you as follows, "Let me caution you, such unfounded assertions are disruptive, time consuming, counter productive, and create a divisive working environment among your peers and subordinates; in the future, be very careful as to making such accusations."
On February 5, 2008, Mr. Caldwell criticized your communication style regarding a complaint registered against you by your subordinate, Paul Lewkowicz. Mr. Caldwell counseled you as follows, "I know the role of supervisor is new to you, the tone of this [your] email is not conducive to a harmonious and productive work environment."
On February 11, 2008/March 10, 2008, Mr. Caldwell issued a "Written Warning" to you regarding the manner in which you communicated with another of your subordinates, Michael Franklin. You had criticized Mr. Franklin's work products pertaining to the following addresses: 190 Vanira, [sic] Avenue SE and 156 Howell Street, S W. Mr. Caldwell followed up by inspecting the site and concurred with the initial assessment of Mr. Franklin. Subsequently, he counseled you as follows, " ... I met with you on February 6 and visited the above referenced site (156 Howell Street, SW) on February 8, 2008. ...Mr. Coffin, whenever there are concerns with an inspection or employee, please discuss them with the employee, and if unresolved, bring them to my attention. On previous occasions I have advised you to refrain from making unsubstantiated accusations or statement that negatively point to the character or integrity of staff; consider this memo a written warning to you."
With regard to your meeting with Director Ibrahim Maslamani, you reported directly to the Division Manager (Mr. Caldwell) and would not normally have interacted with Mr. Maslamani. However, on October 19, 2006, Mr. Maslamani objected to you overstepping the boundaries of your authority in issuing peers (other arborists) work assignments. In an e-mail of the same date, he directed you to cease such activities and refer the issues to Mr. Caldwell.
In May/June 2008, you issued Oral Admonishments to all three of your subordinate staff members. The following month, you indicated your intent to issue a second Oral Admonishment to two of the three subordinate staff. In response, the entire subordinate staff requested and was granted a meeting with Mr. Maslamani. Subsequently, management decided to terminate your services.
Allegation II: "Though I know no specifics of my firing, I do know the context. I have been attempting to address (l) the lack of accountability to the tree protection ordinance and building permit postings, and (2) the near total abdication of enforcement of the tree protection ordinance by my colleagues in the more dfficult areas of correction notices on construction sites and the imposition of recompense and penalties for the illegal destruction of trees on either construction sites or private residences."
Response: Evidence indicates that arborists are allowed the flexibility to make independent decisions about the manner in which they choose to enforce provisions of the City's Tree Ordinance. Arborists may elect to use any of the following tools when working with citizens to preserve trees: stop work orders, imposition of tree protection fencing, posting of corrective notices, prescriptions for silvicultural treatments, requirements for 5-year survivability reports and issuance of citations.
You chose to enforce the Tree Ordinance primarily by issuing citations. Your supervisor and subordinates considered this approach extreme and elected to work with citizens in a more collaborative/non-confrontational manner. This point of disagreement, along with your repeated criticism of subordinates, gave rise to recurring conflicts between you and your staff. Ultimately, these conflicts prompted the above referenced meeting between your staff and Mr. Maslamani.
In conclusion, the investigation revealed that your termination had nothing to do with your technical competence and ability to enforce provisions of the Tree Ordinance. To the contrary, supervisors, subordinates and members of the Tree Commission all acknowledged your technical competence. In fact, the statistics you presented were fairly accurate and support the need for changes in the division's distribution of work.
Evidence indicates that you were terminated as a result of an unwillingness or inability to work in a team environment. Whether receiving a directive from a superior, issuing a directive to a subordinate or simply giving a citation to a citizen, you were consistently inflexible in your response to these situations. Specific examples include: challenging your Commissioner's decision to install a new database system by requesting that the Mayor overrule his position; fostering mistrust with your peers by re-inspecting their properties without their knowledge or management's authorization; imposing adverse actions on subordinates as the principal catalyst for change and improvement instead of embracing training and mentoring to cultivate a successful team; and introducing citizens to the City's arboreal initiative by issuing punitive citations as the primary means of tree conservation. Whether intentional or unintentional, you failed to satisfactorily respond to the constructive criticism of supervisors, promote a harmonious work environment for subordinates, and interface in a non-abrasive manner with citizens who objected to your practices.
You were an "At Will" employee and served at the pleasure of the appointing authority. Evidence indicates that your interaction with managers, subordinates and citizens was deficient and warranted correction. Management chose to sever your employment which was within the bounds of discretion granted an appointing authority. Your employment and disciplinary histories failed to justify overturning this decision. Consequently, your termination stands as issued.
This correspondence serves to conclude all investigative and administrative efforts associated with this complaint. A copy of the investigation and executive summary will be forwarded to you at no charge within three business days. Should you desire additional copies, they will be made available at a cost to be determined.
Sincerely,
Alfred Elder, HR Director
c: Gregory J. Giornelli, Chief Operating Officer
Luz Borrero, Deputy Chief Operating Officer
Benita C . Ransom, Commissioner DHR
Steven Cover, Commissioner - DPCD
Ibrahim Maslamani, Bureau Director
Ainsley Caldwell, Arboricultural Manager
Comments