Frances Bula header image 2

Turnover skyrocketing at Vancouver city hall? Um, no

February 1st, 2011 · 25 Comments

There’s been a lot of reporting on staff departures at Vancouver city hall in the past two years, partly because the new Vision team has made a point of cleaning house, partly because some of the departures have been so high profile, and partly because the city’s former political staffers at Citycaucus have done an energetic job of flagging every departure.

But it’s not the first time there’s been an exodus from the hall.

The first high-profile swan dive I recall was deputy city manager Ted Droettboom, a highly respected guy who quit when then-councillor Jennifer Clarke insisted on bringing in new zoning to the False Creek Flats’ industrial area in preparation for the fabulous high-tech/dotcom boom. Remember that?

Then the tide flowed out copiously after Judy Rogers, with enthusiastic cheering from the development industry, canned the four-day wor week.

Others have quit under various administrations over the years. So is this term unusual?

Here’s the memo from city manager Penny Ballem to various people at city hall.

chart showing retirements, voluntary and involuntary departures for the regular, full-time City staff (+/- 6605) (VPD, VFRS, Parks, Library and City Hall) over past 10 years. (2003 retirement levels higher as a result of pension eligibility changes.)
Year    Retirement      Involuntary     Voluntary       Total Turnover 
2000    2.3%            0.3%            2.7%            5.3%   
2001    2.4%            0.3%            2.2%            4.9%   
2002    2.1%            0.3%            1.8%            4.2%   
2003    4.1%            0.3%            1.7%            6.0%   
2004    2.2%            0.2%            1.8%            4.2%   
2005    2.2%            0.3%            2.1%            4.6%   
2006    2.2%            0.3%            2.6%            5.1%   
2007    2.4%            0.3%            3.3%            6.0%   
2008    2.1%            0.4%            2.4%            4.9%   
2009    2.4%            0.3%            1.6%            4.2%   
2010    2.9%            0.2%            1.4%            4.5%   

So, the answer would appear to be …. no.

My observation. This helps give some needed perspective, as the political opposition tries to stampede all of us in the media and public into thinking people are leaping from the upper floors of city hall. (Some are excited and energized by the changes. And many in the business community are relieved to see some changes.)

But the chart doesn’t give a sense of the psychological impact at the hall of the unusual number of high-profile departures from the city or departures of people like Carlene Robbins, who were apolitical, not particularly Judy Rogers’ clan members, and well respected by many.

It also doesn’t isolate out the different sectors of city hall, so the hall by itself or the park board by itself can’t be compared.

Categories: City Hall Talk · Uncategorized

  • GB

    Wait.

    A post that questions CityCaucus’ partisan shouting and employs *gasp* facts to support another look at all the speculation??

    Seems odd there aren’t any comments!

  • Been There

    Interesting ..
    However what penny pincher doesn’t address is the climate of fear and constant political interference of staff from the Mayor and his legion of bathwater drinkers.

    Working under this environment can be really tough. Worry about being overheard, monitored and second guess or overruled for minutae is rampant.

    It used to be a fun palce to work and many got a sense of satisfaction, now its place where many ride it out till pension time.

    Exemplary employers this crew is not! More like a blueprint of how not run an organization.

  • David Hadaway

    A simple matrix like this is far too crude an instrument to deal with this question. A moment’s thought shows that it does not deal with the effects of the size of the employee base, its age profile, availability of alternative employment, just to start the list of dynamic factors in a complex system.

    Given Dr Ballem’s background she must, I hope, be well aware that this is a meaningless piece of statistical nonsense, as likely to deceive as enlighten.

  • Max

    What this chart does not address it the knowledge lost when senior managment leaves.

    As we have witnessed, you cannot easily replace it.

    ie: Ark Tsisserve being replaced by Will Johnston.

    Not even the same ball park.

  • spartikus

    just to start the list of dynamic factors in a complex system.

    Conversely, those that feel staff turnover at City Hall is unusual have not offered anything other than the anecdotal. Actual numbers is a step up from a public perspective, even if a “simple matrix”.

    It would be interesting to overlay the City’s unemployment rate.

  • Bill McCreery

    The numbers are not what are significant with respect to City staff turnover. That is NOT the issue. Rather, Ms. Ballem’s attempt to place the focus on them is a clear attempt at deflection.

    What is the issue in this matter is WHO these people are, their seniority, knowledge and experience, and WHAT they did. An example of the slash and burn school of public administration can be seen in looking at what has happened in the Electrical Inspection Department. Please consider this report taken form the Fire Techs web site:

    http://www.firetechs.net/library/technewsmain.asp#HouseFire

    “THE LONG SLIDE INTO CHAOS!

    Vancouver’s Brain Blight, which started with Arkady Tsisserev’s (Vancouver’s former City Electrician and Chief Electrical Inspector) dismissal in January 2010, and continued with the removal of Bob Cornwell, Quality Control Manager (and Ark’s immediate assistant), has struck again just recently when I received notification that Laurie Baranyais, Senior Inspections Clerk, got word that her position had been eliminated. I can’t comprehend the reason behind the continued and deliberate effort being made towards further service reductions represented by this latest insanity, but then I’m not crazy, which apparently you have to be to understand the reasons given by City Management that brought us to this sad state of affairs in the first place.

    All I can say is that I’m going to miss Laurie’s smiling face as she manages the counter looking to put the various inspectors together with the customers waiting patiently there, while an ever growing trail of multi-coloured sticky notes meander up her sleeves.

    I’m interested in seeing how Vancouver’s going to respond to the next couple of stories featured below. No word yet on Ark’s replacement, but stay tuned!

    NEWS FLASH! – New Assistant Director Appointed! Is Vancouver really safe?”.

    As well as the list of departed staff, the opinions expressed above highlight the importance of the supportive relationship City Inspectors have with the industries they watch over. I know from practicing architecture for 40 years how essential this is. Qualified, experienced personnel must be in place to ensure ‘Vancouver really is safe’.

  • some guy

    It seems like including the VPD, parks, and library staff numbers in the departure stats would greatly water down the stats from City Hall specifically. Did Ballem provide any departure stats just for City Hall employees?

  • Jason

    Spartikus…fair comment, but so is “some guy”‘s comment above.

    I’d like to see some actual data on the number of people who’ve left city hall specifically since this administration took over, their seniority ,and then compare that to past administrations…any data available?

  • Diderottoo

    ‘some guy’ is right on. |Throwing Police stats and Park Board stats and Fire Departmetn stats in is a conscious attempt to hide the real results of the departure of professional staff at City Hall. It’s the same phenom as Ms Ballem’s refusal to share department-specific results of the employee engagement survey – too damning to be revealed. I dare say that followers of this blog, and any others of the general public who are paying attention, would be far less dissatisfied with Vision if Gregor had had the good judgement to hire someone else to replace Judy Rogers.

    It now takes at least twice as long to get anything done at the Hall since Ms. B instituted “efficiency measures”. That is not an exaggeration nor sour grapes. It is a sad truth that bureauocratization of processes at the Hall has grown exponentially since her arrival. That, accompanied by plunging morale, Mayor’s office meddling, and the hiring of non-professional, outside senior staff to replace those who have left, has had a devistating effect on the civic work force that will, unfortunately, negatively influence public services for a long time to come.

  • Glissando Remmy

    The Thought of The Day

    “Two dogs, one carrying a woven postal sack, were seen exiting the Dance Hall in a gracious Pasodoble. Since that day, the cat has gone missing.”

    That would be my interpretation of the title ‘Turnover skyrocketing at Vancouver city hall? Um, no’
    And yes, I hear Ballem is already putting up posters for the Lost Cat!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sgCQmdEpug

    We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

  • some other guy

    Phew! What a relief. Now we can rest easy. 100 more managers (or senior knowledgeable staff -regardless of their affiliation) can walk out the door in the next month and it will only bump up the stats by 1.5% (100/6605) – a “drop in the bucket”.

    Wait – it’s a new year now – we can lose almost 300 and still only match the overall stats in 2010. And not near as high as 2007.

    The overall numbers, with no breakdown, are meaningless. Period.

  • CH Insider

    I’m a City Hall Employee (for the moment). Been there for 20 years and considering quitting in the next few months.

    I know of a manager who had been with COV that left in November he had been there for over 10 years.

    I know of another senior City Manager’s Employee – exemplary person who left after 32 years in City Managers and a year and a half with Ballem – do we see a pattern here?

    The manager I know also left because of differences with Ballem on how his job should be done.

  • Bill McCreery

    It’s strange that Ms Ballem pops up with instant stats on the ‘leavings’, but objects that providing Council with an up to date inventory of the City’s zoning capacities because it would be to much work (Clr. Woodsworth motion last week).

    One would think a planning department would have such information available. I’m sure Canadian Tire know their inventory on a daily basis, and WAC Bennet knew his hardware store inventory. In fact the planning department has had this information in the recent past. Trish French in her letter to Council last September said:

    “• Staff has estimated that Vancouver already has housing capacity in existing zoning and
    adopted ODPs to accommodate at least 92,000 more people, or about 13 years of
    population growth (based on growth rate between 2001 and 2006);”.

    So, is the information relatively accessible, or is Ms Ballem on another spin?

  • Bobbie Bees

    I’m more than happy to see things shaken up at city hall. Far too many little fiefdoms being run by far too many ‘in it till the pension kicks in’ managers.
    It’s time to bring in the fresh ideas and the fresh perspectives.
    If you want proof that city hall has been in cruise control mode for eons, look no furhter than the leaky condo situation that we had during the ’90s and into the ’00s. When were these buildings built. During the ’80s.
    Food carts on city streets. It’s the year 2011. Why are we just catching up with this idea?

    I think a lot of the mewling coming out of city hall these days has more to do with little fiefdoms being obliterated.

  • Bill McCreery

    @ Bobbie 13.

    You are completely off-base in your ” leaky condo situation” justification to shaking up “little fiefdoms”. Leaky condos had nothing whatsoever to do with the City bureaucracy. They also had little to do with architects and contractors sometimes not up to standard methods. The crux of that problem was a badly written Building Code which was changed fundamentally with respect to building envelope performance. And then, the Federal and Provincial Governments did not properly inform the design professions and construction industry of the implications of these changes. That crisis had very little to do with “fiefdoms” at City Hall. In fact the City of Vancouver Building Department was THE MOST PROACTIVE authority having jurisdiction in Canada in dealing with the problem. Credit where credit is due.

    So, Bees, if you’re looking for scapegoats, look elsewhere. Sorry to muss your hive.

  • Just Plain Sad

    What a relief. Finally, some compelling statistics we can all believe in, and that make us all feel ok. There is less turn-over at City Hall than before! I don’t have to feel guilty anymore about the high I get when I hear of the sacking of another senior manager at City Hall, even if it is a bit fleeting. Off with their heads!

    Please, can we at least try to get some of this spin centred and the story focused on what would be a truly interesting public debate? The real story isn’t about the turnover of City of Vancouver employees at large, it’s about the politicization of the City Hall administration. This recent effort of Penny Ballem’s looks like a case of pre-emptively answering the question you wish you were asked, rather than answering the actual question on peoples’ minds.

    Rather than regurgitating the corporate-wide turnover percentages from across all the ranks and files of a large, ageing, and mostly unionized workforce, why not run a story about what this administration has been highly successful at, which is politicizing the City Hall senior management team?

    How about a quick comparison of the before and after Corporate Management Team (CMT – a defined term for the senior management team comprised mostly of the City’s Department heads) chart (November 2008 versus present)? What is the turnover on this chart? Be specific. For example: the City Manager. The two Deputy City Managers. The General Manager of Olympic Operations. The Manager of Human Resources. The Director of Engineering. The Fire Chief. The Director of Parks and Recreation. Who can help out there? Some of us have lost count. But you should include Penny Ballem in this calculation as she was appointed the first day of the new administration, which means she could only have been selected by politicians, as Gregor and the new Councillors were not yet officials of the City when the decision was made. If the CMT had 16 Department heads prior to the politicization of the bureaucracy, this would be a turnover of 50% in just over 2 years. If it was 12 Department heads, the turnover would be 67%. This is a much more interesting statistic. Probably best, for the purposes of this calculation, to assume “resigned” equals “retired” equals “chose to leave of his/her own for no apparent reason”.

    Acknowledging the successful politicization of the bureaucracy does not have to include historical inaccuracies to be impactful. Just because of what’s happening now doesn’t mean people should get confused about the apolitical approach of earlier administrations. Judy Rogers administration was not an NPA team, just as it wasn’t a COPE team, or a Vision team. During Sam Sullivan’s administration (and those preceding it), Judy Rogers and her administration fought to keep the City Council agenda non-politicized and focused on the business of running a City. The conflicts between the City Manager and the Mayor’s office and staff were legendary among senior staff, and sometimes acrimonious, regardless of political affiliations. Maybe Judy Roger’s problem was that she became too strong. Maybe MacLean’s wrote one too many articles about her.

    It is likely that Gregor’s advisors told him that the second biggest threat to successfully implementing a political agenda is a strong, apolitical administration, particularly one that prioritizes based on need versus politics (the biggest threat is of course a politicized administration, but that’s for the next administration to worry about, and only if it’s not the incumbent administration).

    Frances, there is a story here, and many of us would be interested in a thoughtful exploration of it from someone with your skills. Gregor’s administration: politicized, or not? Politicized administration: good for the taxpayer, or not? Please help us spit out Penny Ballem’s sugar pill and give us some real medicine. It may be bitter, but it could be better for us in the long run.

  • Bobbie Bees

    Sorry Bill, city inspectors totally f’d up on this one. Any moron with two firing neurons could have seen this train wreck coming. But did they say anything? Nope.
    They deserve to wear it.
    End of discussion.

  • Bobbie Bees

    Good thoughts, just plain sad.
    Refreshing to hear thoughts like yours amongst all of the NPA cheerleaders crying in their spilt milk.

    I just wonder, if the NPA had one another term, how would they have dealt with the Owelympic Village fiasco? Would they have had the balls to admit they f’d up or would they still be running around trying to blame it on someone else?

  • Bill McCreery

    @ Bees 17.

    Please let me repeat: “The crux of that problem was a badly written Building Code which was changed fundamentally with respect to building envelope performance. And then, the Federal and Provincial Governments did not properly inform the design professions and construction industry of the implications of these changes. That crisis had very little to do with “fiefdoms” at City Hall.”

    By your reply one assumes you have some particular knowledge of this subject area. Please elaborate, share your knowledge and counter my argument as well.

  • Jason

    City caucus just posted a list of the senior management team who’ve left under Vision…and state that it’s 75% of the team who were there when vision took over. If that’s the case, it does suggest a scary turn over at city hall under vision. Loosing staff is one thing…losing management is something else.

  • Frances Bula

    @Jason. While I do hear lots from people still at city hall and retirees about the bad state there, I’d still like to see the projections that were done a few years ago showing what the rate of turnover was expected to be given the number of people approaching retirement age.

  • Bobbie Bees

    Bill, I was the chief engineer for a property management company that was doing extensive renovations on a building located downtown.
    This project involved a brand new fire alarm, brand new generator, brand new electrical backbone, brand new HVAC system. and a brand new fire escape stairwell.

    Part of the electrical upgrades involved putting a second transformer into our hydro room. So we now had two transformers being fed through one set of switch gear. One transformer was the original 750kva unit and the new transformer was rated for 500kva. The switch gear was upgraded for automatic drop out on under voltage and phase drop.

    For the geeky, both of this buildings dual radial circuits come from Cathedral Square.

    Anyway, this was the epitome of a gong show. Building inspector wanted sprinklers in the hydro room.
    Electrical inspector didn’t want sprinkler in the hydro room.
    Building inspector was threatening to vacate the building if the sprinklers were removed.
    Electrical inspector was threatening to order BC Hydro to disconnect service from the building if the sprinklers weren’t removed.

    This little pissing match went on for over three weeks.

    My solution?

    Wait until the building inspector was on his time off, got the sprinkler fitter to remove the sprinkler lines and heads. Patched up the penetration with firestopping. Called for an electrical inspection to get the electrical sign off for the new hydro room. After the electrical was signed off I had the sprinkler fitter re-install all lines and heads and then had the building inspector come in and sign off on the inspection for the room itself.

    Both inspectors worked under the same boss. But both wanted to have it their own special way.
    And both didn’t care how much it cost us in delays and hold ups.

    Now, so far as the leaky condo issue. Way back in the mid ’90s before I got into commercial property management. Two friends of mine were trying to start up a company. It didn’t work out, they couldn’t get the financing they needed to have a proper start up. Anyways, what they were itching to get into was repairing all of the rot that later became known as the ‘leaky condo issue’. I went out on some small repair jobs with them. It was absolutely disgusting. And to think that these building, the shoddy workmanship and bad design were all being signed off on by city building inspectors.
    Now, I know you’ll point out that the National Building Code was to blame. The walls couldn’t breath, the moisture would get in and it couldn’t get out.
    Nice try.
    Most of the issues were due to bad workmanship.
    J-mouldings visually installed upside down.
    Black paper scaled in the wrong direction.
    Completely inappropriate use of black paper.
    Stucco mix cut down with ‘Sunlight’ dishwashing detergent.
    Silicone sealant being used instead of proper caulking or gaskets.
    This wasn’t just an issue due to water being caught in the walls. This was an issue of the walls weren’t able to resist the water in the first place.
    But that’s okay, cause it all passed inspection, right?

  • Just Plain Sad

    @ Frances 21

    So the count appears to be 9 of 12 senior public managers gone. It is very hard for an administration or its apologists to hold credibility when it attributes a 75% turnover of its Corporate Management Team in 2 years to retirement rather than its systematic politicization of the bureaucracy.

    Why not be accountable for such an aggressively effective program? Acknowledgement and open public discourse would go a long way. Any other organization, private or public, would be in crisis mode if it lost or pushed out 75% of its executive management team in 24 months. Most who know those departed senior executives will know most, if not all, left early, some as early as 20 years. Clinging to the “but they were projected to retire” pitch is just plain sad.

  • Brenton

    Clinging to the “but they were projected to retire” pitch is just plain sad.

    Unless, of course, they were projected to retire.

  • Bobbie Bees

    @Brenton #24

    Come on Brenton, you should know better. Everyone knows that under the NPA none of these people would have ever retired. They all would have happily kept working for an NPA Mayor and council well into their ’90s.
    Why, they would have been working right up until the day they just dropped dead.
    That’s dedication.