~ CEO says score not deserved ~
PHILIPSBURG–St. Maarten Communications Union (SMCU) President Ludson Evers has accused TelEm Group Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Kendall Dupersoy of unjustly reducing his evaluation score from 4.9 to 3.1 (out of a possible 5) after the evaluation was independently conducted by his supervisor and approved by another company representative.
Evers sees Dupersoy’s move as a personal act against him and will be looking into what legal options are open to him to address the matter.
Dupersoy acknowledged in an invited comment that he had reduced Evers’ total evaluation grade, but says Evers by making the matter public, is trying to “bully his way to an evaluation grade that he does not deserve.”
The evaluation score is used to determine performance-based bonuses given to staffers, with a higher score resulting in a better bonus package.
Evers told reporters at a press conference on Thursday that he will be going to see an attorney on Monday on the matter. “My evaluation was done by my supervisor and approved by the Technical Director and Dupersoy changed and lowered it,” Evers said.
The union president, who was part of the team that came up with the evaluation process and says he knows it like the palm of his hand, indicated that the system was set up in such a way as to avoid these types of vindictive actions from CEOs of the company.
He said Dupersoy did not have the right to tamper with the evaluation score. Any changes had to be made prior to the evaluation’s approval, he said, adding that the only way Dupersoy would have a say is during an appeals process. Evers said the company’s Human Resources Manager should have advised Dupersoy that he had no right to tamper with the evaluation score.
“I feel that it’s personal and I will be seeking legal action,” said Evers.
Dupersoy said Evers is incorrect when he says the CEO has no jurisdiction to change the score. “The matter of his Supervisor and Director signing the document, even though the Director agreed that the grade of 4.9 was not warranted, undermines the entire evaluation process,” Dupersoy contended.
“As the CEO it is my duty to maintain the integrity of the evaluation process. All evaluations throughout the organisation are signed off by the CFO [Chief Financial Officer – Ed.] and the CEO.
“If I as CEO know for a fact that an evaluation is either too low or too high, I have the obligation to investigate. In investigating Mr. Evers’ evaluation, his direct supervisor mentioned his exemplary performance right after Hurricanes Irma and Maria, to which I informed the Supervisor that the evaluation period is from July to November and not two weeks after the hurricane. As such, the evaluation process has an area where the evaluator is obligated to support the grade given.
“In the case of Mr. Evers the evaluator’s support was consistently that Mr. Evers is doing his job as described in the competencies, with no accompanying support for the perfect scores given. Additionally, the section of the evaluation that measures objectives, where again perfect scores were given without the proper support when it is clear to the entire organization that the department where Mr. Evers works has not been close to perfect.
“As an example we can use the fact that the very supervisor that gave Mr. Evers his perfect scores indicated to me personally that generators were failing after the hurricanes due to lack of maintenance and maintenance is the core responsibility of the Power Department.
“If indeed Mr. Evers feels his perfect score is justified, the company has a transparent appeals process that can be followed. It is clear to me that Mr. Evers uses his position as union president to intimidate his colleagues for personal gain, a situation that will not be tolerated while I am in the position of CEO.
“The very fact that Mr. Evers saw it fit to go public with this situation proves that he is again trying to bully his way to an evaluation grade that he does not deserve. I, however, am not intimidated by Mr. Evers or the union.
“The company/union relationship is supposed to be one based on respect and understanding. Both parties are supposed to have the interest of the organisation as their top priority, which seems not to be the case with Mr. Evers, as he is trying to use his position as a union leader to bolster his self-interest.”